Journals / Journal of Urological Surgery / 2022 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 1

The Comparison of Conventional and Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy for Clinical, Pathological, and Oncological Outcomes

Pages
1–8
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The frequency of patients with the American Society of Anesthesiologists Class-2 score was higher in the RsRARP group (p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: This study aimed to assess and compare the conventional and Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (cRARP and RsRARP) in term of perioperative clinical, pathological, and oncological outcomes.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: This study included 238 consecutive male patients who underwent RARP between May 2008 and November 2020.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The frequency of patients with the American Society of Anesthesiologists Class-2 score was higher in the RsRARP group (p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2008 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to assess and compare the conventional and Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (cRARP and RsRARP) in term of perioperative clinical, pathological, and oncological outcomes. Materials and Methods: This study included 238 consecutive male patients who underwent RARP between May 2008 and November 2020. RARP operations were performed by a single-surgeon. Patients were divided into groups according to the surgical approach and were statistically compared in terms of perioperative clinical, final pathological, and oncological outcomes. Results: The mean age of patients was 64±7 years. cRARP was performed in 134 (56.3%) patients, whereas RsRARP in 104 (43.7%). The frequency of patients with the American Society of Anesthesiologists Class-2 score was higher in the RsRARP group (p

🔖

Cite This Article

Karşıyakalı, N., Sağlıcan, Y., Türkeri, L., Özgen, M. B., Durak, H., Özveren, B. (2022). The Comparison of Conventional and Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy for Clinical, Pathological, and Oncological Outcomes. Journal of Urological Surgery, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 1, 1–8. https://ajindex.com/articles/568584

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, Cornford P, De Santis M, Fanti S, Gillessen S, Grummet J, Henry AM, Lam TB, Mason MD, van der Poel HG, van der Kwast TH, Rouvière O, Schoots I, Tilki D, Wiegel T. EAU - ESTRO - ESUR - SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer 2020. European Association of Urology Guidelines. 2020 Edition., Vol presented at the EAU Annual Congress Amsterdam 2020. Arnhem, The Netherlands, European Association of Urology Guidelines Office, 2020
  2. Abbou CC, Hoznek A, Salomon L, Lobontiu A, Saint F, Cicco A, Antiphon P, Chopin D. Prostatectomie radicale laparoscopique réalisée à distance par robot. A propos d’un cas [Remote laparoscopic radical prostatectomy carried out with a robot. Report of a case]. Prog Urol 2000;10:520-523
  3. Binder J, Kramer W. Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2001;87:408-410
  4. Yaxley JW, Coughlin GD, Chambers SK, Occhipinti S, Samaratunga H, Zajdlewicz L, Dunglison N, Carter R, Williams S, Payton DJ, Perry-Keene J, Lavin MF, Gardiner RA. Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus open radical retropubic prostatectomy: early outcomes from a randomised controlled phase 3 study. Lancet 2016;388:1057-1066
  5. Ilic D, Evans SM, Allan CA, Jung JH, Murphy D, Frydenberg M. Laparoscopic and robotic-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localised prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;9:CD009625
  6. Tewari A, Peabody J, Sarle R, Balakrishnan G, Hemal A, Shrivastava A, Menon M. Technique of da Vinci robot-assisted anatomic radical prostatectomy. Urology 2002;60:569-572
  7. Rocco F, Carmignani L, Acquati P, Gadda F, Dell’Orto P, Rocco B, Bozzini G, Gazzano G, Morabito A. Restoration of posterior aspect of rhabdosphincter shortens continence time after radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 2006;175:2201-2206
  8. Patel VR, Coelho RF, Palmer KJ, Rocco B. Periurethral suspension stitch during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of the technique and continence outcomes. Eur Urol 2009;56:472-478
  9. Menon M, Shrivastava A, Bhandari M, Satyanarayana R, Siva S, Agarwal PK. Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: technical modifications in 2009. Eur Urol 2009;56:89-96
  10. Galfano A, Ascione A, Grimaldi S, Petralia G, Strada E, Bocciardi AM. A new anatomic approach for robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a feasibility study for completely intrafascial surgery. Eur Urol 2010;58:457-461
  11. Sayyid RK, Simpson WG, Lu C, Terris MK, Kl