Feasibility and safety of hospital discharge 24 hours after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

被引:0
作者
Javier Diaz, Francisco [1 ]
Hernandez, Virginia [1 ]
de la Pena, Enrique [1 ]
Blazquez, Cristina [1 ]
Dolores Martin, Maria [2 ]
Llorente, Carlos [1 ]
机构
[1] Hosp Univ Fdn Alcorcon, Serv Urol, Madrid 28922, Spain
[2] Hosp Univ Fdn Alcorcon, Madrid 28922, Spain
来源
ARCHIVOS ESPANOLES DE UROLOGIA | 2013年 / 66卷 / 10期
关键词
Prostatic neoplasms; Laparoscopy; Prostatectomy; Hospital stay; Complications; RETROPUBIC PROSTATECTOMY; EXPERIENCE; COMPLICATIONS; EVOLUTION;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVES: Minimally invasive techniques for the surgical treatment of prostate cancer have aimed to achieve the same functional and oncological outcomes of open surgery with a significant decrease in postoperative morbidity and a subsequent decreasing hospital stay These improvements are important in the current economic context. Our aim was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of hospital discharge 24 h after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). METHODS : A total of 266 consecutive patients with clinical diagnosis of localized prostate cancer consecutively treated with extraperitoneal LRP between May 2007 and December 2010 were analyzed. There were no exclusion criteria for the surgical procedure. Patients were discharged in less than 24 h only in the case of absence of medical complications, with drainage of less than 50 mL allowing its removal before discharge, normal oral feeding tolerance, no significant hematuria by bladder catheter and good functional recovery of the patient. All surgery-related complications that occurred within 90 days after surgery were recorded and were classified according to the modified Clavien scale. RESULTS : A total of 266 patients who underwent LRP were studied with a median follow-up of 34 months. 80 (30.1%) patients were discharged from the hospital in less than 24h. 89 (33.4%) patients were discharged within 48 h and 97 (36.5 %) after 48h. The mean hospital stay of the entire case series was 2.9 days (SD 3.08). The mean hospital stay of patients who were discharged after 48h was 5,5 days (SD 3.94). Thirty-one patients (10.7%) experienced post-surgical complications. 25 (9.3%) of them were classified as Clavien I or II, and 6 (2.2%) Clavien III or IV. A total of 9 (3.3%) patients were readmitted. Of the group of patients who were discharged within 24h only one was readmitted due to hematuria. CONCLUSIONS: Extraperitoneal LRP is the standard treatment for localized prostate cancer in our institution. This treatment reliably and safely allows a hospital stay shorter than 24 h in a significant percentage of our patients.
引用
收藏
页码:931 / 938
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
[21]   Intraoperative frozen section analysis during nerve sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Feasibility study [J].
Fromont, G ;
Baumert, H ;
Cathelineau, X ;
Rozet, F ;
Validire, P ;
Vallancien, G .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2003, 170 (05) :1843-1846
[22]   Evaluating Urinary Continence and Preoperative Predictors of Urinary Continence After Robot Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy [J].
Novara, G. ;
Ficarra, V. ;
D'elia, C. ;
Secco, S. ;
Cioffi, A. ;
Cavalleri, S. ;
Artibani, W. .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2010, 184 (03) :1028-1033
[23]   Comparison of renal function after robot - assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy versus retropubic radical prostatectomy [J].
Ergin, Giray ;
Doluoglu, Omer Gokhan ;
Kirac, Mustafa ;
Kilinc, Muhammet Fatih ;
Kopru, Burak ;
Keseroglu, Bugra Bilge ;
Hoscan, Mustafa Burak .
INTERNATIONAL BRAZ J UROL, 2019, 45 (01) :83-88
[24]   Persistent Vesicourethral Anastomotic Leak After Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: Laparoscopic Solution [J].
Castillo, Octavio A. ;
Alston, Celeste ;
Sanchez-Salas, Rafael .
UROLOGY, 2009, 73 (01) :124-126
[25]   Comparison of length of hospital stay between radical retropubic prostatectomy and robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy [J].
Nelson, Bradford ;
Kaufman, Melissa ;
Broughton, Gregory ;
Cookson, Michael S. ;
Chang, Sam S. ;
Herrell, S. Duke ;
Baumgartner, Roxelyn G. ;
Smith, Joseph A., Jr. .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2007, 177 (03) :929-931
[26]   Perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and open radical prostatectomy: 10 years of cases at Ramathibodi Hospital [J].
Sirisopana, Kun ;
Jenjitranant, Pocharapong ;
Sangkum, Premsant ;
Kijvikai, Kittinut ;
Pacharatakul, Suthep ;
Leenanupun, Charoen ;
Kochakarn, Wachira ;
Kongchareonsombat, Wisoot .
TRANSLATIONAL ANDROLOGY AND UROLOGY, 2019, 8 (05) :467-+
[27]   Preliminary results of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) after fellowship training and experience in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) [J].
Wolanski, Philippe ;
Chabert, Charles ;
Jones, Lee ;
Mullavey, Tarryn ;
Walsh, Sharon ;
Gianduzzo, Troy .
BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2012, 110 :64-70
[28]   Extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy - Results after 50 cases [J].
Bollens, R ;
Vanden Bossche, M ;
Roumeguere, T ;
Damoun, A ;
Ekane, S ;
Hoffmann, P ;
Zlotta, AR ;
Schulman, CC .
EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2001, 40 (01) :65-69
[29]   Incontinence after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a reverse systematic review [J].
Neto, Wilmar Azal ;
Capibaribe, Diego M. ;
Dal Col, Luciana S. B. ;
Andrade, Danilo L. ;
Moretti, Tomas B. C. ;
Reis, Leonardo O. .
INTERNATIONAL BRAZ J UROL, 2022, 48 (03) :389-396
[30]   Safety and Feasibility of Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy for the Treatment of Bladder Cancer [J].
Aboumarzouk, Omar M. ;
Hughes, Owen ;
Narahari, Krishna ;
Drewa, Tomasz ;
Chlosta, Piotr L. ;
Kynaston, Howard .
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2013, 27 (09) :1083-1095