Nosnik Israel P, Gan Tong J, Moul Judd W
Duke University School of Medicine, Division of Urology, Box 3707, Durham, NC 27710, USA.
Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2007 Sep;7(9):1309-17. doi: 10.1586/14737140.7.9.1309.
The introduction of robotic laparoscopic assisted prostatectomy at our institution and nationwide has been a great advancement and has caused us to focus and fine-tune our goal for improvements in prostate cancer outcomes whether the patient elects for robotic laparoscopic assisted prostatectomy or open minimally invasive radical retropubic prostatectomy. While these authors favor the open technique performed by highly skilled urologic surgical oncologists, the lessons we have learned to date suggest that it is the skill of the surgeon that determines outcome, regardless of whether or not the operation is performed by an open or robotic laparoscopic technique. The concepts we have articulated here are related to resection and avoidance of positive margins, limited intraoperative blood loss and pain control, which allow equivalence in these outcome areas, regardless of technique.
在我们机构以及全国范围内,机器人腹腔镜辅助前列腺切除术的引入是一项巨大的进步,这使我们无论是在患者选择机器人腹腔镜辅助前列腺切除术还是开放性微创耻骨后前列腺切除术时,都更加关注并微调我们改善前列腺癌治疗效果的目标。虽然这些作者更倾向于由技术高超的泌尿外科手术肿瘤学家实施的开放手术技术,但我们目前学到的经验表明,决定治疗效果的是外科医生的技术,而无论手术是采用开放技术还是机器人腹腔镜技术。我们在此阐述的概念与切除和避免切缘阳性、减少术中失血以及控制疼痛有关,这些在治疗效果方面无论采用何种技术都能达到相同水平。