antigen (PSA) level of ≤ 10 ng/mL, a Gleason sum of ≤ 7 and a prostate volume of ≤ 50 mL. This group was randomly divided in those having SV-RPP (147 men) and a classical RPP (171); men in the third group with adverse factors were offered a classical RRP (190). The main endpoint of the trial was the early continence rate at 4 weeks after surgery. RESULTSThe oncological outcome of patients treated with SV-RPP was no different from that of RPP or RRP. Continence rates (0-1 pad/day) at 4 weeks and 12 months after SV-RPP were 61.7% and 96.3%, respectively, and significantly higher than with RPP ( P < 0.023) and RRP ( P < 0.005). The transfusion rates (3.4%), anastomotic leaks (6.6%) and mean operative duration (90 min) were significantly lower. CONCLUSIONSSV-RPP is a better technique in reducing complications during and after surgery for selected patients. Leaving the SV in place did not increase the short-term PSA relapse rates. As the operation was significantly faster and with better early recovery, SV-RPP might be justified if the long-term oncological data confirm the efficacy of the approach. KEYWORDSprostate cancer, radical prostatectomy, perineal, nerve-sparing, seminal vesiclesparing Study Type -Therapy (RCT) Level of Evidence 1b OBJECTIVETo report a new and improved seminal vesicle-sparing (SV) technique of radical perineal prostatectomy (RPP) as an option for patients with localized prostate cancer, which is currently competing with the retropubic RP (RRP), endoscopic and robotic approaches.

No abstract

SV-RPP represents an improved perineal technique with respect to intraoperative and postoperative complications whilst maintaining an oncological outcome comparable to RPP and RRP. Leaving seminal vesicles in situ did not result in increased PSA relapse rates.

No abstract

Therapiekosten bei erektiler Dysfunktion bei Beamten. Urteil des Bundesverwaltungsgerichts Zusammenfassung Die Kosten therapeutischer Maßnahmen zur Behandlung einer postoperativen erektilen Dysfunktion nach radikaler Prostatektomie müssen bei Beamten durch die Beihilfestelle erstattet werden. Der Antrag auf Revision eines diesbezüglichen Urteils durch das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen wurde nun vor dem Bundesverwaltungsgericht abgelehnt, so dass die Entscheidung rechtskräftig ist.