Martínez-Salamanca J I, Allona Almagro A
Department of Urology, Weill Medical College at Cornell University, New York, USA.
Actas Urol Esp. 2007 Jun;31(6):603-10. doi: 10.1016/s0210-4806(07)73696-3.
Radical prostatectomy (RP) is today, in any of its four approaches (perineal (PRP), retropubic (ARP), laparoscopic (LRP) or robotic (RRP), the standard surgical treatment in localized prostate cancer. It looks clear that the minimum invasive approaches (laparoscopy and robotics) are able to reduce hospital stay as well as blood loss and therefore transfusion requirement. Also, laparoscopic results at mid and robotics at short term, seem to indicate, that both are safe oncologically and able to obtain same or even superior, functional results. Our objective has been to evaluate the economic impact that these techniques have to consider their definitive implantation, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of its potential implementation in our health system.
根治性前列腺切除术(RP)如今在其四种手术入路(经会阴(PRP)、耻骨后(ARP)、腹腔镜(LRP)或机器人辅助(RRP))中的任何一种方式下,都是局限性前列腺癌的标准外科治疗方法。很明显,微创入路(腹腔镜和机器人辅助手术)能够减少住院时间以及失血量,从而降低输血需求。此外,腹腔镜手术的中期结果和机器人辅助手术的短期结果似乎表明,这两种手术在肿瘤学上都是安全的,并且能够获得相同甚至更好的功能结果。我们的目标是评估这些技术在考虑其最终应用时的经济影响,以及在我们的医疗系统中潜在应用的优缺点。