Alessandro Sciarra, Alessandro Gentilucci, Susanna Cattarino, Michele Innocenzi, Francesca Di Quilio, Andrea Fasulo, Von Heland Magnus, Vincenzo Gentile, Stefano Salciccia
Dipartimento di Urologia - Unità della prostata, Università La Sapienza, Roma, Italia.
Istituto Nazionale Italiano di Statistica - Ricercatore di Statistica, Roma, Italia.
Int Braz J Urol. 2016 Mar-Apr;42(2):223-33. doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.0385.
To prospectively compare the laparoscopic versus open approach to RP in cases with high prostate volume and to evaluate a possible diferente impact of prostate volume.
From March 2007 to March 2013 a total of 120 cases with clinically localized prostate cancer (PC) and a prostate volume>70cc identified for radical prostatectomy (RP), were prospectively analyzed in our institute. Patients were offered as surgical technique either an open retropubic or an intraperitoneal laparoscopic (LP) approach. In our population, 54 cases were submitted to LP and 66 to open RP. We analyzed the association of the surgical technique with perioperative, oncological and postoperative functional parameters.
In those high prostate volume cases, the surgical technique (laparoscopic versus open) does not represent a significant independent factor able to influence positive surgical margins rates and characteristics (p=0.4974). No significant differences (p>0.05) in the overall rates of positive margins was found, and also no differences following stratification according to the pathological stage and nerve sparing (NS) procedure. The surgical technique was able to significantly and independently influence the hospital stay, time of operation and blood loss (p<0.001). On the contrary, in our population, the surgical technique was not a significant factor influencing all pathological and 1-year oncological or functional outcomes (p>0.05).
In our prospective non randomized analysis on high prostate volumes, the laparoscopic approach to RP is able to guarantee the same oncological and functional results of an open approach, maintaining the advantages in terms of perioperative outcomes.
前瞻性比较腹腔镜手术与开放手术治疗前列腺体积较大患者的根治性前列腺切除术(RP),并评估前列腺体积可能产生的不同影响。
2007年3月至2013年3月,我院对120例临床局限性前列腺癌(PC)且前列腺体积>70cc并计划行根治性前列腺切除术(RP)的患者进行了前瞻性分析。患者可选择开放式耻骨后或腹膜内腹腔镜(LP)手术方式。在我们的研究人群中,54例行LP手术,66例行开放式RP手术。我们分析了手术方式与围手术期、肿瘤学及术后功能参数之间的关系。
在那些前列腺体积较大的病例中,手术方式(腹腔镜与开放手术)并非影响手术切缘阳性率及特征的显著独立因素(p=0.4974)。在切缘阳性总体率方面未发现显著差异(p>0.05),根据病理分期和保留神经(NS)手术进行分层后也未发现差异。手术方式能够显著且独立地影响住院时间、手术时间和失血量(p<0.001)。相反,在我们的研究人群中,手术方式并非影响所有病理及1年肿瘤学或功能结局的显著因素(p>0.05)。
在我们对前列腺体积较大患者的前瞻性非随机分析中,腹腔镜下RP手术能够保证与开放手术相同的肿瘤学和功能结果,同时保持围手术期结局方面的优势。