May Matthias, Dorst Manuela, May Jana, Hoschke Bernd, Fahlenkamp Dirk, Vogler Horst, Siegsmund Michael
Department of Urology, Carl-Thiem Hospital Cottbus, Cottbus, Germany.
Urol Nurs. 2007 Dec;27(6):519-26.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the oncological and functional outcome of retropubic and perineal approaches to radical prostatectomy.
Data from 1,304 patients who underwent either radical retropubic (RRP) or radical perineal prostatectomy (RPP) over a 12-year period were compared. Variables included age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level preoperative, prostate volume, Gleason score, estimated blood loss (EBL), blood transfusion rate (BTR), operative duration, surgical margin, pathological stage, short and long-term complication rates, impotence, and incontinence rates.
RRP had a longer operative duration, higher EBL, higher BTR, and longer hospital stay. The 5-year biochemical-free survival rates were not significantly different between the two techniques.
These results indicate there are no significant differences in oncological and functional outcomes between RRP and RPP. However, RPP demonstrates minimal EBL, low BTR, and shorter operative duration.
本研究的目的是评估耻骨后和会阴入路根治性前列腺切除术的肿瘤学和功能结局。
比较了12年间1304例行耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术（RRP）或会阴根治性前列腺切除术（RPP）患者的数据。变量包括年龄、术前前列腺特异性抗原（PSA）水平、前列腺体积、Gleason评分、估计失血量（EBL）、输血率（BTR）、手术时间、手术切缘、病理分期、短期和长期并发症发生率、阳痿和尿失禁发生率。
RRP的手术时间更长、EBL更高、BTR更高且住院时间更长。两种技术的5年无生化复发生存率无显著差异。
这些结果表明RRP和RPP在肿瘤学和功能结局方面无显著差异。然而，RPP的EBL最小、BTR低且手术时间短。
Zotero 插件