保留retzius机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术与开放式耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术:一项为期19个月随访的前瞻性比较研究。

Q1 Medicine
Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica Pub Date : 2020-10-01 Epub Date: 2020-08-04 DOI:10.23736/S0393-2249.20.03830-8
Ali Abdel Raheem, Ayman Hagras, Ahmed Ghaith, Mohamed J Alenzi, Ahmed Elghiaty, Tarek Gameel, Ibrahim Alowidah, Won S Ham, Young D Choi, Abdel H El-Bahnasy, Adel Omar, Mohamed El-Bendary, Koon H Rha
{"title":"保留retzius机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术与开放式耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术:一项为期19个月随访的前瞻性比较研究。","authors":"Ali Abdel Raheem,&nbsp;Ayman Hagras,&nbsp;Ahmed Ghaith,&nbsp;Mohamed J Alenzi,&nbsp;Ahmed Elghiaty,&nbsp;Tarek Gameel,&nbsp;Ibrahim Alowidah,&nbsp;Won S Ham,&nbsp;Young D Choi,&nbsp;Abdel H El-Bahnasy,&nbsp;Adel Omar,&nbsp;Mohamed El-Bendary,&nbsp;Koon H Rha","doi":"10.23736/S0393-2249.20.03830-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of the present study was to compare the surgical outcomes of retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) and open retropubic radical prostatectomy (ORP).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included patients with clinically localized prostate cancer who underwent RS-RARP or ORP and met our inclusion criteria. We compared the perioperative, oncological, and continence outcomes between both surgical approaches. Continence function was assessed using the validated International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form. Continence was defined as using 0-1 safety pad per day. Biochemical recurrence (BCR) was defined as two consecutive rises in serum PSA more than 0.2 ng/mL. Events of local recurrence, distant metastasis, and cancer death were reported and compared using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Between 1 June 2013 and 1 October 1 2016, 184 men were enrolled, of whom 125 underwent RS-RARP and 59 underwent ORP. Baseline demographic and pathological characteristics were similar between both groups (P>0.05). Patients in RS-RARP group had significantly lower blood loss, fewer transfusion rates, lower VAS score, and shorter hospital stay than patients in ORP group (P<0.05). Major complications (≥grade 3b) did not differ between both groups (P=0.121). Positive surgical margins were 28.8% and 24.8% in ORP and RS-RARP, respectively (P=0.494). The BCR free-survival rates in ORP and RS-RARP at 1-year was 87.3% and 92.3%, respectively (Log-rank, P=0.740). At 1-, 6-, and 12-month after surgery, 42.4%, 79.7%, and 84.7% of men undergoing ORP were continent, compared with 72.8%, 90.4%, and 92% undergoing RS-RARP, respectively. Men in RS-RARP group achieved faster recovery of urinary continence compared to men in ORP group (Log-rank, P=0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RS-RARP had better perioperative outcomes and faster recovery of urinary continence compared with ORP. Short-term oncological outcomes were comparable between both surgical approaches.</p>","PeriodicalId":49015,"journal":{"name":"Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica","volume":" ","pages":"586-594"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy versus open retropubic radical prostatectomy: a prospective comparative study with 19-month follow-up.\",\"authors\":\"Ali Abdel Raheem,&nbsp;Ayman Hagras,&nbsp;Ahmed Ghaith,&nbsp;Mohamed J Alenzi,&nbsp;Ahmed Elghiaty,&nbsp;Tarek Gameel,&nbsp;Ibrahim Alowidah,&nbsp;Won S Ham,&nbsp;Young D Choi,&nbsp;Abdel H El-Bahnasy,&nbsp;Adel Omar,&nbsp;Mohamed El-Bendary,&nbsp;Koon H Rha\",\"doi\":\"10.23736/S0393-2249.20.03830-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of the present study was to compare the surgical outcomes of retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) and open retropubic radical prostatectomy (ORP).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included patients with clinically localized prostate cancer who underwent RS-RARP or ORP and met our inclusion criteria. We compared the perioperative, oncological, and continence outcomes between both surgical approaches. Continence function was assessed using the validated International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form. Continence was defined as using 0-1 safety pad per day. Biochemical recurrence (BCR) was defined as two consecutive rises in serum PSA more than 0.2 ng/mL. Events of local recurrence, distant metastasis, and cancer death were reported and compared using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Between 1 June 2013 and 1 October 1 2016, 184 men were enrolled, of whom 125 underwent RS-RARP and 59 underwent ORP. Baseline demographic and pathological characteristics were similar between both groups (P>0.05). Patients in RS-RARP group had significantly lower blood loss, fewer transfusion rates, lower VAS score, and shorter hospital stay than patients in ORP group (P<0.05). Major complications (≥grade 3b) did not differ between both groups (P=0.121). Positive surgical margins were 28.8% and 24.8% in ORP and RS-RARP, respectively (P=0.494). The BCR free-survival rates in ORP and RS-RARP at 1-year was 87.3% and 92.3%, respectively (Log-rank, P=0.740). At 1-, 6-, and 12-month after surgery, 42.4%, 79.7%, and 84.7% of men undergoing ORP were continent, compared with 72.8%, 90.4%, and 92% undergoing RS-RARP, respectively. Men in RS-RARP group achieved faster recovery of urinary continence compared to men in ORP group (Log-rank, P=0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RS-RARP had better perioperative outcomes and faster recovery of urinary continence compared with ORP. Short-term oncological outcomes were comparable between both surgical approaches.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49015,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"586-594\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0393-2249.20.03830-8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/8/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0393-2249.20.03830-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/8/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

背景:本研究的目的是比较保留retzius的机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术(RS-RARP)和开放式耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术(ORP)的手术效果。方法:我们纳入了临床局限性前列腺癌患者,他们接受了RS-RARP或ORP,并符合我们的纳入标准。我们比较了两种手术入路的围手术期、肿瘤和尿失禁结果。使用国际失禁咨询问卷-尿失禁简短表格评估失禁功能。自制被定义为每天使用0-1个安全垫。生化复发(BCR)定义为连续两次血清PSA升高超过0.2 ng/mL。报告局部复发、远处转移和癌症死亡事件,并使用Kaplan-Meier生存分析进行比较。结果:2013年6月1日至2016年10月1日,184名男性入组,其中125人接受RS-RARP, 59人接受ORP。两组基线人口学和病理特征相似(P>0.05)。与ORP组相比,RS-RARP组患者出血量明显减少,输血率明显降低,VAS评分明显降低,住院时间明显缩短(p)。结论:RS-RARP组围手术期预后较ORP组好,尿失禁恢复较快。两种手术方式的短期肿瘤预后相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy versus open retropubic radical prostatectomy: a prospective comparative study with 19-month follow-up.

Background: The aim of the present study was to compare the surgical outcomes of retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) and open retropubic radical prostatectomy (ORP).

Methods: We included patients with clinically localized prostate cancer who underwent RS-RARP or ORP and met our inclusion criteria. We compared the perioperative, oncological, and continence outcomes between both surgical approaches. Continence function was assessed using the validated International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form. Continence was defined as using 0-1 safety pad per day. Biochemical recurrence (BCR) was defined as two consecutive rises in serum PSA more than 0.2 ng/mL. Events of local recurrence, distant metastasis, and cancer death were reported and compared using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

Results: Between 1 June 2013 and 1 October 1 2016, 184 men were enrolled, of whom 125 underwent RS-RARP and 59 underwent ORP. Baseline demographic and pathological characteristics were similar between both groups (P>0.05). Patients in RS-RARP group had significantly lower blood loss, fewer transfusion rates, lower VAS score, and shorter hospital stay than patients in ORP group (P<0.05). Major complications (≥grade 3b) did not differ between both groups (P=0.121). Positive surgical margins were 28.8% and 24.8% in ORP and RS-RARP, respectively (P=0.494). The BCR free-survival rates in ORP and RS-RARP at 1-year was 87.3% and 92.3%, respectively (Log-rank, P=0.740). At 1-, 6-, and 12-month after surgery, 42.4%, 79.7%, and 84.7% of men undergoing ORP were continent, compared with 72.8%, 90.4%, and 92% undergoing RS-RARP, respectively. Men in RS-RARP group achieved faster recovery of urinary continence compared to men in ORP group (Log-rank, P=0.001).

Conclusions: RS-RARP had better perioperative outcomes and faster recovery of urinary continence compared with ORP. Short-term oncological outcomes were comparable between both surgical approaches.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica
Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica publishes scientific papers on nephrology and urology. Manuscripts may be submitted in the form of Minerva opinion editorials, editorial comments, original articles, video illustrated articles, review articles and letters to the Editor.
×
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