Is there any evidence of superiority between retropubic, laparoscopic or robot-assisted radical prostatectomy?
Int. braz. j. urol
;
37(2): 146-160, Mar.-Apr. 2011. tab
Article
in English
| LILACS
| ID: lil-588989
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE:
To compare the perioperative, short-term and long-term postoperative results of radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP), laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) in the most recent studies evaluable. MATERIALS ANDMETHODS:
Using PubMed we have undertaken a search based on references from major and recent articles with considerable sample sizes.RESULTS:
The operative blood loss and the risk of transfusion were lower in the laparoscopic and robotic-assisted approaches. The surgical duration was shorter in the open and robotic group. Regarding the positive margins, continence and potency no substantial differences between the RRP, LRP, and RALP were found.CONCLUSIONS:
Our results suggest that no one surgical approach is superior in terms of functional and early oncologic outcomes. Potential advantages of any surgical approach have to be confirmed through longer-term follow-up and adequately designed clinical studies.
Full text:
Available
Index:
LILACS (Americas)
Main subject:
Prostatectomy
/
Robotics
/
Laparoscopy
Type of study:
Etiology study
/
Observational study
/
Prognostic study
/
Risk factors
Limits:
Humans
/
Male
Language:
English
Journal:
Int. braz. j. urol
Journal subject:
Urology
Year:
2011
Type:
Article
Similar
MEDLINE
...
LILACS
LIS