ABSTRACT
The minimally invasive procedures (mips) for the treatment of symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia (bph) are presented as attractive techniques due to their ease of accomplishment and the possibility of outpatient treatment. This guideline aims to present recommendations that may assist in decision making in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia and indication of the different minimally invasive therapies. For this, a systematic review of the literature was performed, with the descriptors according to the pico: patient with benign prostatic hyperplasia, minimally invasive therapy, clinical outcome and adverse events. With no time restriction, in medline, cochrane central and lilacs databases via vhl, 1,007 papers were retrieved, of which 16 were selected to respond to clinical doubt. Details of the methodology and results of this guideline are set out in annex I.
Subject(s)
Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/methods , Prostatic Hyperplasia/surgery , Evidence-Based Medicine , Humans , Male , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/classification , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Urinary Tract/surgery , Urination Disorders/surgeryABSTRACT
SUMMARY The minimally invasive procedures (mips) for the treatment of symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia (bph) are presented as attractive techniques due to their ease of accomplishment and the possibility of outpatient treatment. This guideline aims to present recommendations that may assist in decision making in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia and indication of the different minimally invasive therapies. For this, a systematic review of the literature was performed, with the descriptors according to the pico: patient with benign prostatic hyperplasia, minimally invasive therapy, clinical outcome and adverse events. With no time restriction, in medline, cochrane central and lilacs databases via vhl, 1,007 papers were retrieved, of which 16 were selected to respond to clinical doubt. Details of the methodology and results of this guideline are set out in annex I
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Prostatic Hyperplasia/surgery , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/methods , Urinary Tract/surgery , Urination Disorders/surgery , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/classification , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Evidence-Based MedicineABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: It is believed that robotic assistance allows for improved suture reapproximation of tissue and decreases the lengthy learning time that is needed to master laparoscopic suturing. But there have been no studies directly comparing the efficiency of robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) to freehand laparoscopy (LS) and open surgery (OS). The purpose of this study was to compare the quality of the suture anastomosis of the ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) using the three techniques and to evaluate their associated learning curves. STUDY DESIGN: The operative time for dismembered pyeloplasties performed in 57 pigs by 3 inexperienced and 1 experienced surgeon using each of the techniques was measured. The anastomosis was evaluated for water tightness and patency using antegrade and retrograde urodynamic measurements immediately after surgery and 2 weeks postoperatively. The histology of the operated UPJ was also evaluated at 15 days postoperatively. RESULTS: RALS had a shorter procedural time and less steep learning curve compared with LS. Urodynamic measurements for patency and water tightness of the UPJ were comparable to those in the OS group. But with experience, both the RALS and LS procedural times and the urodynamic measurements for water tightness and patency of the UPJ approached those of the OS group. Histologic evaluation demonstrated that there was less collagen III deposition around the operated UPJ in pigs that underwent RALS compared with LS and OS. CONCLUSIONS: Among inexperienced surgeons, the efficiency of performing suturing using RALS is operator independent, requires less time to learn, and is better than those done by LS technique.