Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic and open retropubic radical prostatectomy

IF 0.2 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
B. Shabani, O. Ivanovski, S. Gurmeshevski, Armend Rufati, A. Panovska-Petrusheva, Vita Stojmenovska, G. Petrushevska
{"title":"Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic and open retropubic radical prostatectomy","authors":"B. Shabani, O. Ivanovski, S. Gurmeshevski, Armend Rufati, A. Panovska-Petrusheva, Vita Stojmenovska, G. Petrushevska","doi":"10.2298/sarh230404054s","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction/Objective Radical prostatectomy is a treatment option with high curative potential in patients with prostate cancer of moderate-risk. The aim of the study is to assess perioperative results of laparoscopic (LRP) and open retropubic radical prostatectomy (ORRP). Methods From 2016 to 2020, a total of 244 patients undergone RP, as follow: 145 patients LRP and 99 patients ORRP. Demographic data, preoperative parameters, perioperative and pathological outcomes were analyzed and compared among LRP and ORRP groups. Results In regard to demographic data and preoperative parameters (BMI, mean age, median pretreatment PSA, clinical stage and Gleason score from biopsy), there are no differences between the observed groups. Patients from ORRP group had significantly shorter operative time (p < 0.05). Patients from LRP group had major advantages in regard to estimated blood loss (EBL) (550 ml for LRP vs. 1450 ml for ORRP), hospitalization time (six days for LRP vs. nine days for ORRP), catheter removal (6.5 days for LRP vs. 12 days for ORRP), overall complication rates (29% for LRP vs. 48.4% for ORRP) and blood transfusion rates (22.7% for LRP and 37.4% for ORRP). Conclusion Both LRP and ORRP provide favorable operative results in terms of efficacy, safety and oncologic outcome. However, patients undergoing LRP were more likely to have less EBL, shorter length of hospital stay, earlier catheter removal and lower rates of overall perioperative complications.","PeriodicalId":22263,"journal":{"name":"Srpski arhiv za celokupno lekarstvo","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Srpski arhiv za celokupno lekarstvo","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2298/sarh230404054s","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction/Objective Radical prostatectomy is a treatment option with high curative potential in patients with prostate cancer of moderate-risk. The aim of the study is to assess perioperative results of laparoscopic (LRP) and open retropubic radical prostatectomy (ORRP). Methods From 2016 to 2020, a total of 244 patients undergone RP, as follow: 145 patients LRP and 99 patients ORRP. Demographic data, preoperative parameters, perioperative and pathological outcomes were analyzed and compared among LRP and ORRP groups. Results In regard to demographic data and preoperative parameters (BMI, mean age, median pretreatment PSA, clinical stage and Gleason score from biopsy), there are no differences between the observed groups. Patients from ORRP group had significantly shorter operative time (p < 0.05). Patients from LRP group had major advantages in regard to estimated blood loss (EBL) (550 ml for LRP vs. 1450 ml for ORRP), hospitalization time (six days for LRP vs. nine days for ORRP), catheter removal (6.5 days for LRP vs. 12 days for ORRP), overall complication rates (29% for LRP vs. 48.4% for ORRP) and blood transfusion rates (22.7% for LRP and 37.4% for ORRP). Conclusion Both LRP and ORRP provide favorable operative results in terms of efficacy, safety and oncologic outcome. However, patients undergoing LRP were more likely to have less EBL, shorter length of hospital stay, earlier catheter removal and lower rates of overall perioperative complications.
腹腔镜和开放式耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术的围手术期疗效
简介/目的根治性前列腺切除术是中危前列腺癌患者的一种治疗选择,具有很高的治愈潜力。本研究的目的是评估腹腔镜(LRP)和开放式耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术(ORRP)的围手术期效果。方法2016 - 2020年共244例患者行RP,其中LRP 145例,ORRP 99例。分析比较LRP组和ORRP组的人口学资料、术前参数、围手术期及病理结果。结果在人口学数据和术前参数(BMI、平均年龄、预处理PSA中位数、临床分期和活检Gleason评分)方面,观察组间无差异。ORRP组患者手术时间明显缩短(p < 0.05)。LRP组患者在估计失血量(EBL) (LRP组550 ml vs ORRP组1450 ml)、住院时间(LRP组6天vs ORRP组9天)、拔管(LRP组6.5天vs ORRP组12天)、总并发症发生率(LRP组29% vs ORRP组48.4%)和输血率(LRP组22.7% vs ORRP组37.4%)方面具有主要优势。结论LRP和ORRP在疗效、安全性和肿瘤预后方面均具有良好的手术效果。然而,接受LRP的患者更有可能发生更少的EBL,更短的住院时间,更早的拔管和更低的围手术期并发症发生率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Srpski arhiv za celokupno lekarstvo
Srpski arhiv za celokupno lekarstvo MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
50.00%
发文量
104
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Srpski Arhiv Za Celokupno Lekarstvo (Serbian Archives of Medicine) is the Journal of the Serbian Medical Society, founded in 1872, which publishes articles by the members of the Serbian Medical Society, subscribers, as well as members of other associations of medical and related fields. The Journal publishes: original articles, communications, case reports, review articles, current topics, articles of history of medicine, articles for practitioners, articles related to the language of medicine, articles on medical ethics (clinical ethics, publication ethics, regulatory standards in medicine), congress and scientific meeting reports, professional news, book reviews, texts for "In memory of...", i.e. In memoriam and Promemoria columns, as well as comments and letters to the Editorial Board. All manuscripts under consideration in the Serbian Archives of Medicine may not be offered or be under consideration for publication elsewhere. Articles must not have been published elsewhere (in part or in full).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信