Advances in robotic prostatectomy

被引：2

作者：

Boorjian S.A. ^{[1
]}

Gettman M.T. ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] Department of Urology, Mayo Medical School, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905

来源：

Current Urology Reports | 2008年 / 9卷 / 3期

关键词：

Radical Prostatectomy; Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy; Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy; Positive Margin Rate; Open Radical Prostatectomy;

D O I：

10.1007/s11934-008-0043-y

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) has emerged as an important treatment option for localized prostate cancer. As such, methods to improve instrumentation, technique, outcomes, and cost require continued investigation. For example, a recently introduced four-armed robotic system has limited the need for bedside assistants, while an enhanced understanding of pelvic anatomy as visualized robotically has led to valuable modifications in operative technique. Increased surgeon experience has decreased perioperative morbidity, and has resulted in short-term pathologic and functional outcomes that compare favorably with open radical prostatectomy. Meanwhile, quality-of-life studies using validated instruments are helping to define the time course of patient recovery. Nevertheless, costs associated with robotic surgery remain daunting. As the follow-up of patients treated with RALP matures, future studies, ideally with a prospective, randomized design, will be needed to establish the long-term oncologic efficacy of the procedure and to evaluate the overall advantages of RALP compared with open surgery. Copyright © 2008 by Current Medicine Group LLC.

引用

页码：250 / 256

页数：6

共 36 条

[1]

Roehl K.A., Han M., Ramos C.G., Et al., Cancer progression and survival rates following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy in 3478 consecutive patients: Long-term results, J Urol, 172, pp. 910-914, (2004)

[2]

Ward J.F., Slezak J.M., Blute M.L., Et al., Radical prostatectomy for clinically advanced (cT3) prostate cancer since the advent of prostate-specific antigen testing: 15-year outcome, BJU Int, 95, pp. 751-756, (2005)

[3]

Schuessler W.W., Schulam P.G., Clayman R.V., Et al., Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Initial short-term experience, Urology, 50, pp. 179-181, (1997)

[4]

Abbou C.C., Hoznek A., Salomon L., Et al., Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with a remote controlled robot, J Urol, 165, pp. 1964-1966, (2001)

[5]

Menon M., Shrivastava A., Tewari A., Et al., Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: Establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes, J Urol, 168, pp. 945-949, (2002)

[6]

Esposito M.P., Ilbeigi P., Ahmed M., Lanteri V., Use of a fourth arm in da Vinci robot-assisted extraperitoneal laparoscopic prostatectomy: Novel technique, Urology, 66, pp. 649-652, (2005)

[7]

Mattel A., Naspro R., Annino F., Et al., Tension and energy-free robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with interfascial dissection of the neurovascular bundles, Eur Urol, 52, pp. 687-695, (2007)

[8]

Menon M., Kaul S., Bhandari A., Et al., Potency following robotic radical prostatectomy: A questionnaire based analysis of outcomes after conventional nerve sparing and prostatic fascia sparing techniques, J Urol, 174, pp. 2291-2296, (2005)

[9]

Gettman M.T., Blute M.L., Critical comparison of laparoscopic, robotic, and open radical prostatectomy: Techniques, outcomes, and cost, Curr Urol Rep, 7, pp. 193-199, (2006)

[10]

Menon M., Tewari A., Peabody J.O., Et al., Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy, a technique of robotic radical prostatectomy for management of localized carcinoma of the prostate: Experience of over 1100 cases, Urol Clin North Am, 31, pp. 701-717, (2004)

← 1 2 3 4 →