• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

经验丰富的术者行开放性与早期机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术:一项10年的前瞻性与回顾性比较

Experienced Open vs Early Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: A 10-year Prospective and Retrospective Comparison.

作者信息

Jackson Max A, Bellas Nicholas, Siegrist Timothy, Haddock Peter, Staff Ilene, Laudone Vincent, Wagner Joseph R

机构信息

Urology Division, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT.

Urology Service, Middlesex Hospital, Middletown, CT.

出版信息

Urology. 2016 May;91:111-8. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2015.12.072. Epub 2016 Feb 12.

DOI:10.1016/j.urology.2015.12.072
PMID:26879735
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To undertake a prospective/retrospective comparison of longer-term oncologic and quality of life outcomes in open radical prostatectomy (ORP) or robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The clinical progression of ORP and RALP patients who underwent surgery during 2004 was followed over an extended (10 year) period. Pre- and perioperative parameters, oncologic outcomes, recurrence, mortality, and quality of life were compared between surgical modalities. Follow-up time was calculated from the time of surgery to the latest contact. Postoperative quality of life data were obtained from Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite survey questionnaires. Recurrence rates, times to recurrence, surgical time, length of stay, hematocrit, follow-up time, and sexual and urinary bother scores were compared between surgical groups. Multivariate analyses were used to predict positive surgical margins and biochemical recurrence.

RESULTS

63 ORP and 116 RALP patients were included (mean age of 60.4 ± 6.4 and 58.6 ± 5.8 years; P = .067), with follow-up times of 10.3 and 10.1 years (P = .191). RALP patients had longer operative times (P < .001), shorter hospital stays (P < .001), and higher discharge hematocrits (P < .001). With prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, and T-stage as covariates, time to recurrence (P = .365) and positive margin rate (P = .230) were not statistically different between groups. Ninety-five percent of RALP patients were continent and 48.0% were potent vs 92.6% and 41.5% of ORP patients (P = .720; .497). Urinary and sexual bother were not significantly different between groups (P = .392; .985).

CONCLUSION

Our longer-term follow-up data suggest that ORP and RALP patients have comparable oncologic and quality of life outcomes.

摘要

目的

对接受开放性根治性前列腺切除术(ORP)或机器人辅助腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术(RALP)的患者的长期肿瘤学和生活质量结果进行前瞻性/回顾性比较。

材料与方法

对2004年接受手术的ORP和RALP患者的临床进展进行了长达10年的随访。比较了手术方式之间的术前和围手术期参数、肿瘤学结果、复发、死亡率和生活质量。随访时间从手术时间计算至最近一次联系时间。术后生活质量数据来自扩展前列腺癌指数综合调查问卷。比较了手术组之间的复发率、复发时间、手术时间、住院时间、血细胞比容、随访时间以及性和泌尿系统困扰评分。采用多变量分析来预测手术切缘阳性和生化复发情况。

结果

纳入63例ORP患者和116例RALP患者(平均年龄分别为60.4±6.4岁和58.6±5.8岁;P = 0.067),随访时间分别为10.3年和10.1年(P = 0.191)。RALP患者的手术时间更长(P < 0.001),住院时间更短(P < 0.001),出院时血细胞比容更高(P < 0.001)。以前列腺特异性抗原、Gleason评分和T分期作为协变量,两组之间的复发时间(P = 0.365)和切缘阳性率(P = 0.230)无统计学差异。95%的RALP患者控尿,48.0%性功能保留,而ORP患者分别为92.6%和41.5%(P = 0.720;0.497)。两组之间的泌尿系统和性方面的困扰无显著差异(P = 0.392;0.985)。

结论

我们的长期随访数据表明,ORP和RALP患者在肿瘤学和生活质量结果方面具有可比性。

相似文献

1
Experienced Open vs Early Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: A 10-year Prospective and Retrospective Comparison.经验丰富的术者行开放性与早期机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术:一项10年的前瞻性与回顾性比较
Urology. 2016 May;91:111-8. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2015.12.072. Epub 2016 Feb 12.
2
Biochemical recurrence-free survival after robotic-assisted laparoscopic vs open radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer.机器人辅助腹腔镜与开放根治性前列腺切除术治疗中高危前列腺癌的生化无复发生存率。
Urology. 2014 Jun;83(6):1309-15. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.02.023. Epub 2014 Apr 18.
3
Comparison of oncological and health-related quality of life outcomes between open and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for localised prostate cancer - findings from the population-based Victorian Prostate Cancer Registry.开放性与机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术治疗局限性前列腺癌的肿瘤学及健康相关生活质量结局比较——基于人群的维多利亚州前列腺癌登记处的研究结果
BJU Int. 2016 Oct;118(4):563-9. doi: 10.1111/bju.13380. Epub 2015 Dec 19.
4
Community-based Outcomes of Open versus Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy.基于社区的开放式与机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术的结果比较。
Eur Urol. 2018 Feb;73(2):215-223. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.04.027. Epub 2017 May 9.
5
Comparison of outcomes between pure laparoscopic vs robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a study of comparative effectiveness based upon validated quality of life outcomes.纯腹腔镜与机器人辅助腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术的疗效比较:基于经过验证的生活质量结局的比较效果研究。
BJU Int. 2012 Mar;109(6):898-905. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10551.x. Epub 2011 Sep 20.
6
Impact of Variations in Prostatic Apex Shape on Apical Margin Positive Rate After Radical Prostatectomy: Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy vs Open Radical Prostatectomy.前列腺尖部形态变异对根治性前列腺切除术后切缘阳性率的影响:机器人辅助腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术与开放性根治性前列腺切除术的比较
J Endourol. 2018 Jan;32(1):46-53. doi: 10.1089/end.2017.0693. Epub 2018 Jan 5.
7
Comparisons of the perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes after robot-assisted versus pure extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.机器人辅助与纯腹膜外腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术的围手术期、功能和肿瘤学结果比较。
Eur Urol. 2014 Mar;65(3):610-9. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.11.049. Epub 2012 Dec 1.
8
Benchmarks for operative outcomes of robotic and open radical prostatectomy: results from the Health Professionals Follow-up Study.机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术与开放性根治性前列腺切除术的手术结果基准:健康专业人员随访研究的结果
Eur Urol. 2015 Mar;67(3):432-8. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.01.039. Epub 2014 Feb 11.
9
A comparison of the incidence and location of positive surgical margins in robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and open retropubic radical prostatectomy.机器人辅助腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术与开放性耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术中阳性手术切缘的发生率及位置比较。
J Urol. 2007 Dec;178(6):2385-9; discussion 2389-90. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.08.008. Epub 2007 Oct 22.
10
Prospective Multicenter Comparison of Open and Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: The PROST-QA/RP2 Consortium.前瞻性多中心开放与机器人根治性前列腺切除术比较:PROST-QA/RP2 联盟。
J Urol. 2022 Jan;207(1):127-136. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000002176. Epub 2021 Aug 26.

引用本文的文献

1
Outcomes over 20 years performing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a single-surgeon experience.20 多年来机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺切除术的结果:单外科医生经验。
World J Urol. 2023 Apr;41(4):1047-1053. doi: 10.1007/s00345-023-04346-7. Epub 2023 Mar 17.
2
Comparison of retropubic, laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy: who is the winner?经耻骨后、腹腔镜和机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术的比较:谁是赢家?
World J Urol. 2018 Apr;36(4):609-621. doi: 10.1007/s00345-018-2174-1. Epub 2018 Jan 23.
3
Long-term cancer control outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer treatment: a meta-analysis.
机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术治疗前列腺癌的长期癌症控制效果:一项荟萃分析。
Int Urol Nephrol. 2017 Jun;49(6):995-1005. doi: 10.1007/s11255-017-1552-8. Epub 2017 Feb 25.
4
Extraperitoneal vs. transperitoneal robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in patients with a history of prior inguinal hernia repair with mesh.有既往腹股沟疝补片修补史患者的腹膜外与经腹膜机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术对比
J Robot Surg. 2017 Dec;11(4):447-454. doi: 10.1007/s11701-017-0678-0. Epub 2017 Jan 24.
5
Comparison of Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Open Radical Prostatectomy Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术与开放性根治性前列腺切除术疗效比较:一项系统评价与Meta分析
Yonsei Med J. 2016 Sep;57(5):1165-77. doi: 10.3349/ymj.2016.57.5.1165.