Laparoscopic and robotic-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localised prostate cancer

Ilić, Dragan; Evans, Sue; Allan, Christie; Jung, Jae Hung; Murphy, Declan; Frydenberg, Mark

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd009625.pub2

Cited by 162 publications

(159 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

135

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is an abridged version of a Cochrane review published in the Cochrane Library titled ‘Laparoscopic and robotic‐assisted vs open radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localised prostate cancer’ .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The aim of the present review, therefore, was to assess the effects of LRP or RARP compared with ORP in men with localized prostate cancer. This is an abridged version of a Cochrane review published in the Cochrane Library titled 'Laparoscopic and roboticassisted vs open radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localised prostate cancer' [14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Laparoscopic and robot‐assisted vs open radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer: a Cochrane systematic review

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laparoscopic and robot‐assisted vs open radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer: a Cochrane systematic review

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…from Yaxley et al [43], shows that functional outcomes after 3 months did not differ between a robot-assisted and an open RP approach. A recent review including two unique studies with 446 randomised patients could not find any differences in the men's quality of life between these three surgical approaches [44].…”

Section: Strengths and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Health‐related quality of life in active surveillance and radical prostatectomy for low‐risk prostate cancer: a prospective observational study (HAROW ‐ Hormonal therapy, Active Surveillance, Radiation, Operation, Watchful Waiting)

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

HRQOL is an important aspect in the decision-making and advising process for patients with prostate cancer. In many aspects of HRQOL, AS is associated with more favourable outcomes than RP within the first 1-2 years after diagnosis in our observational design, although the differences were not clinically significant. The result that HRQOL in AS patients is at least as high as in RP patients should be considered when advising patients about the different treatment options for low-risk localised prostate cancer.

show abstract

“…Суще-ствует мнение, что частота стрессового недержания мочи значимо ниже после робот-ассистированной лапароскопической радикальной простатэктомии по сравнению с лапароскопической радикальной про-статэктомией (отношение рисков (ОР) 2,58; 95 % до-верительный интервал (ДИ) 1,75; р <0,001) [1]. Однако имеются данные об отсутствии различий функциональных результатов удержания мочи и нару-шений эректильной функции после робот-ассистиро-ванной и лапароскопической простатэктомией (ОР 1,30; 95 % ДИ 4,65-2,05) [2]. Таким образом, восста-новление удержания мочи у этой категории пациентов остается актуальной задачей.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Biofeedback-assisted pelvic floor muscle training in patients with urinary incontinence after laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

Винаров¹,

Rapoport²,

Крупинов³

et al. 2018

Cancer Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Pelvic floor muscle exercises are used as a first-line treatment for urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy. Their efficacy is still being investigated. The use of biofeedback when teaching pelvic floor muscle exercises to patients increases the effectiveness of therapy.Objective: to assess the efficacy of biofeedback-assisted pelvic floor muscle training in patients with urinary incontinence after laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and to compare the results of teaching.Materials and methods. A total of 64 patients with urinary incontinence after nerve sparing prostatectomy underwent biofeedback-assisted pelvic floor muscle rehabilitation. Radical laparoscopic surgery was performed in 48 (75 %) patients, whereas robot-assisted surgery was performed in 16 (25 %) patients. The patients started their training 2 months postoperatively. We used two-channel electromyography with the Neurotrack ETS system (United Kingdom) to teach the patients isolated pelvic floor muscle contractions. After achieving a minimum activity of abdominal muscles during pelvic floor muscle contractions, the patients started exercises.Results. There was no significant difference in age between patients who underwent laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (р = 0.79). Fifty-five patients (85.9%) acquired the skill of isolated pelvic floor muscle contractions and could perform training on their own. The remaining 9 patients (14.1 %) required regular support from healthcare professionals at an outpatient unit (1–2 biofeedback-assisted trainings per month). Thus, the type of surgery did not affect the process of training. The type of radical prostatectomy had no impact on the acquisition of the pelvic floor muscle contraction skill.Conclusion. The time for restoration of urinary continence by biofeedback-assisted pelvic floor muscle training did not vary between patients after laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

show abstract

Laparoscopic and robotic-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localised prostate cancer

Abstract: Laparoscopic and robotic-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localised prostate cancer.

Cited by 162 publications

References 51 publications

Laparoscopic and robot‐assisted vs open radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer: a Cochrane systematic review

Laparoscopic and robot‐assisted vs open radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer: a Cochrane systematic review

Health‐related quality of life in active surveillance and radical prostatectomy for low‐risk prostate cancer: a prospective observational study (HAROW ‐ Hormonal therapy, Active Surveillance, Radiation, Operation, Watchful Waiting)

Biofeedback-assisted pelvic floor muscle training in patients with urinary incontinence after laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About