Benarroche Davy, Paladini Alessio, Grobet-Jeandin Elisabeth, Vaessen Christophe, Parra Jerome, Seisen Thomas, Pinar Ugo, Roupret Morgan
GRC 5, Predictive Onco-Urology, APHP, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hôpital, Urology, Sorbonne University, 75013, Paris, France.
Department of Medicine and Surgery, Division of Urology, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.
World J Urol. 2022 Dec;40(12):3001-3006. doi: 10.1007/s00345-022-04176-z. Epub 2022 Oct 14.
Robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a recently described surgical approach, but comparison with open simple prostatectomy (OSP) lack in the literature. We compared perioperative outcomes of OSP versus RASP.
Patients who underwent simple prostatectomy between 2017 and 2020 were included in this retrospective study. OSP was performed by the transvesical technique and RASP was performed with a DaVinci Xi robot, using the transvesical extraperitoneal approach. Perioperative and postoperative data were compared and complications risk factors for complications were identified.
and limitations. Overall, 103 patients were included (median age 72 years [IQR = 67-76]). Forty-seven underwent RASP and 56 OSP. The median volume of the prostate gland was 130 mL [IQR = 100-180] in the RASP group and 126 mL [IQR = 100-160] in the OSP group. RASP was associated with a significant reduction in blood loss (median 200 vs. 400 mL; p < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (5 vs. 10 days; p < 0.001) and median catheterisation time (4 vs. 9 days; p < 0.001). In the RASP group, there were fewer grade ≥ 2 complications (2 (4.3%) vs. 13 (23.2%); p = 0.005) and less need for transfusions (0 vs. 6 (11%), p = 0.005). Preoperative prostate volume was a risk factor for complications (OR = 1.2 [95% CI 1.1-1.5]; p = 0.01) while robot-assisted surgery was a protective factor (OR 0.3 [95% CI 0.05-0.9]; p = 0.05). Functional outcomes between the two groups were identical at 12 months follow up.
RASP is a safe and effective procedure. When compared with OSP, RASP was associated with decreased morbidity as well as reduced hospital stay and catheterisation time. Functional outcomes were comparable to the open approach.
机器人辅助单纯前列腺切除术(RASP)用于良性前列腺增生(BPH)是一种最近描述的手术方法,但文献中缺乏与开放性单纯前列腺切除术(OSP)的比较。我们比较了OSP和RASP的围手术期结果。
本回顾性研究纳入了2017年至2020年间接受单纯前列腺切除术的患者。OSP采用经膀胱技术进行,RASP采用达芬奇Xi机器人,经膀胱腹膜外途径进行。比较围手术期和术后数据,并确定并发症的危险因素。
结果与局限性。总体而言,共纳入103例患者(中位年龄72岁[IQR = 67 - 76])。47例行RASP,56例行OSP。RASP组前列腺中位体积为130 mL[IQR = 100 - 180],OSP组为126 mL[IQR = 100 - 160]。RASP与出血量显著减少(中位200 vs. 400 mL;p < 0.001)、住院时间缩短(5 vs. 10天;p < 0.001)和中位导尿时间缩短(4 vs. 9天;p < 0.001)相关。在RASP组,≥2级并发症较少(2例(4.3%) vs. 13例(23.2%);p = 0.005),输血需求也较少(0例 vs. 6例(11%),p = 0.005)。术前前列腺体积是并发症的危险因素(OR = 1.2[95%CI 1.1 - 1.5];p = 0.01),而机器人辅助手术是保护因素(OR 0.3[95%CI 0.05 - 0.9];p = 0.05)。两组在12个月随访时的功能结局相同。
RASP是一种安全有效的手术方法。与OSP相比,RASP与发病率降低、住院时间和导尿时间缩短相关。功能结局与开放手术相当。