Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
2.
JSLS ; 11(3): 315-20, 2007.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17931513

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Erectile function after prostate surgery is an important criterion for patients when they are choosing a treatment modality for prostate cancer. Improved visualization, dexterity, and precision afforded by the da Vinci robot allow a precise dissection of the neurovascular bundles. We objectively assessed erectile function after robot-assisted extraperitoneal prostatectomy by using the SHIM (IIEF-5) validated questionnaire. METHODS: Between July 2003 and September 2004, 150 consecutive men underwent da Vinci robot-assisted extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. The IIEF-5 questionnaire was used to assess postoperative potency in 67 patients who were at least 6 months postsurgery. Erectile function was classified as impotent (<11), moderate dysfunction (11 to 15), mild dysfunction (16 to 21), and potent (22 to 25). All patients used oral pharmacological assistance postprocedure. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients were available to complete the IIEF-5 questionnaire 6 months to 1 year postprostatectomy. Twelve patients were excluded from the study who abstained from all sexual activity after surgery for emotional or social reasons. Of the 55 patients evaluated, 22 (40%) were impotent, 3 (5.5%) had moderate ED, 12 (21.8%) had mild ED, and 18 (32.7%) were fully potent. The table compares IIEF-5 scores with nerve-sparing status. Of patients who had bilateral nerve sparing, 28/45 (62.2%) had mild or no ED within 6 to 12 months postsurgery, and all expressed satisfaction with their current sexual function or rate of improvement after robotic prostatectomy. CONCLUSION: Robot-assisted extraperitoneal prostatectomy provides comparable outcomes to those of open surgery with regards to erectile function. Assessment of the ultimate maximal erectile function will require continued analysis, as this is likely to further improve beyond 6 to 12 months.


Subject(s)
Prostatectomy/methods , Aged , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prostate/innervation , Recovery of Function , Robotics , Treatment Outcome
3.
JSLS ; 11(4): 443-8, 2007.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18237507

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Erectile function after prostate surgery is an important criterion for patients when they are choosing a treatment modality for prostate cancer. Improved visualization, dexterity, and precision afforded by the da Vinci robot allow a precise dissection of the neurovascular bundles. We objectively assessed erectile function after robot-assisted extraperitoneal prostatectomy by using the SHIM (IIEF-5) validated questionnaire. METHODS: Between July 2003 and September 2004, 150 consecutive men underwent da Vinci robot-assisted extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. The IIEF-5 questionnaire was used to assess postoperative potency in 67 patients who were at least 6 months postsurgery. Erectile function was classified as impotent (<11), moderate dysfunction (11 to 15), mild dysfunction (16 to 21), and potent (22 to 25). All patients used oral pharmacological assistance postprocedure. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients were available to complete the IIEF-5 questionnaire 6 months to 1 year postprostatectomy. Twelve patients were excluded from the study who abstained from all sexual activity after surgery for emotional or social reasons. Of the 55 patients evaluated, 22 (40%) were impotent, 3 (5.5%) had moderate erectile dysfunction (ED), 12 (21.8%) had mild ED, and 18 (32.7%) were fully potent. The table compares IIEF-5 scores with nerve-sparing status. Of patients who had bilateral nerve sparing, 28/45 (62.2%) had mild or no ED within 6 to 12 months postsurgery, and all expressed satisfaction with their current sexual function or rate of improvement after robotic prostatectomy. CONCLUSION: Robot-assisted extraperitoneal prostatectomy provides comparable outcomes to those of open surgery with regards to erectile function. Assessment of the ultimate maximal erectile function will require continued analysis, as this is likely to further improve beyond 6 to 12 months.


Subject(s)
Penile Erection , Prostatectomy/methods , Robotics , Aged , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Orgasm , Recovery of Function , Surveys and Questionnaires
4.
JSLS ; 9(3): 368-9, 2005.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16121892

ABSTRACT

Laparoscopic mesh hernia repair is an effective form of management of inguinal hernias. Polypropylene mesh is generally placed at the internal rings extending across the midline resulting in an intense fibrotic reaction that can make subsequent radical retropubic prostatectomy and lymphadenectomy difficult. We report the first case of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy following laparoscopic bilateral mesh hernia repair.


Subject(s)
Herniorrhaphy , Laparoscopy , Prostatectomy/methods , Surgical Mesh , Aged , Humans , Male
5.
BJU Int ; 96(1): 39-42, 2005 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15963117

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To compare our experience of pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RAP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The two techniques were compared retrospectively in 100 patients with localized prostate cancer who had LRP or RAP (50 each). Both groups were similar in age, serum prostate-specific antigen level, Gleason score and clinical stage. Their charts were reviewed, collating intraoperative data and early functional outcome. RESULTS: The mean surgical time for LRP and RAP was 235 and 202 min (P > 0.05) and mean (95% confidence interval) blood loss 299 (40) and 206 (63) mL (P = 0.014), with no transfusions in either group. The positive margin rate did not differ significantly (14% LRP and 12% RAP) and there was no biochemical recurrence in either group. Early functional outcomes were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Both LRP and RAP are technically demanding, but feasible, with the patient clearly benefiting. There were no major surgical differences between the techniques, but RAP is more costly.


Subject(s)
Laparoscopy/methods , Prostatectomy/methods , Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery , Robotics , Erectile Dysfunction/etiology , Humans , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Prostatectomy/instrumentation , Retrospective Studies , Urinary Incontinence/surgery
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...