Lein Michael, Stibane Inna, Mansour Ramin, Hege Claudia, Roigas Jan, Wille Andreas, Jung Klaus, Kristiansen Glen, Schnorr Dietmar, Loening Stefan A, Deger Serdar
Department of Urology, Charité Hospital Berlin, Campus Mitte, University Medicine Berlin, Germany.
Eur Urol. 2006 Dec;50(6):1278-82; discussion 1283-4. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.06.023. Epub 2006 Jul 5.
Laparoscopic transperitoneal radical prostatectomy (LRP) is an alternative to open radical prostatectomy, but data based on large populations are not frequently available. This study was initiated to evaluate LRP with regard to complications, urinary continence, and oncologic outcome.
We retrospectively reviewed 1000 consecutive patients with a mean age of 62 yr (SD+/-6 yr) and clinically localized prostate cancer. Between May 1999 and October 2004, all 1000 patients underwent LRP performed by eight urologists at one institution (Charité Hospital Berlin, Campus Mitte). The review procedure was based on complete patient documents (hospital stay, n=1000) and an interview by one physician. Histopathologic results, intraoperative and early and late complications, continence rate, and time to first PSA increase (n=952) were recorded. Erectile function was not part of this review. Twenty-two patients received neoadjuvant treatment for >2 mo.
The median follow-up was 28.8 mo (range: 7.2 to 69.7). Intraoperative and early complications occurred in 11.8% of patients. In 77.6% the urethrovesical anastomosis tested by cystography at day 5 or 6 after LRP was intact; 76% used none or not more than one pad per 24h. The overall PSA-free survival was more than 90% for pT2, 80.3% for pT3a, and 72.4% for pT3b until July 2005. The mortality rate was 0.3%.
In the present series of 1000 patients, a specific disadvantage of LRP compared with the open approach, as reported in the literature, could not be shown. On the basis of short-term follow-up data, our retrospective evaluation confirms that LRP provides satisfactory results. We believe that laparoscopic radical prostatectomy can be the technique of choice in the future.
腹腔镜经腹膜前列腺癌根治术(LRP)是开放性前列腺癌根治术的一种替代术式,但基于大量人群的数据并不常见。开展本研究以评估LRP在并发症、尿失禁及肿瘤学结局方面的情况。
我们回顾性分析了1000例连续的患者,其平均年龄为62岁(标准差±6岁),患有临床局限性前列腺癌。在1999年5月至2004年10月期间,这1000例患者均在同一机构(柏林夏里特医院米特区)由8名泌尿外科医生实施了LRP。回顾程序基于完整的患者病历(住院病历,n = 1000)以及一名医生进行的访谈。记录组织病理学结果、术中及早期和晚期并发症、尿失禁率以及首次PSA升高的时间(n = 952)。勃起功能未纳入本次回顾。22例患者接受了超过2个月的新辅助治疗。
中位随访时间为28.8个月(范围:7.2至69.7个月)。11.8%的患者发生术中及早期并发症。在LRP术后第5或6天通过膀胱造影检查,77.6%的患者尿道膀胱吻合口完整;76%的患者每24小时使用不超过一片尿垫或不用尿垫。至2005年7月,pT2期患者的总体无PSA生存率超过90%,pT3a期为80.3%,pT3b期为72.4%。死亡率为0.3%。
在本系列1000例患者中,未显示出LRP与文献报道的开放性手术相比存在特定劣势。基于短期随访数据,我们的回顾性评估证实LRP可提供令人满意的结果。我们认为腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术未来可能成为首选技术。