Robotic radical prostatectomy: The new gold standard

Chopra, Sameer; Srivastava, Abhishek; Tewari, Ashutosh

doi:10.1016/j.aju.2011.12.005

Cited by 15 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, open radical prostatectomy is associated with a high rate of complications, including intraoperative hemorrhage 6,7 and postoperative urinary incontinence 6,8‐10 . Robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has become an established and validated treatment for prostatic cancer in human medicine 11,12 . In dogs, it might overcome the aforementioned drawbacks of open radical prostatectomy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

First robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy in a client‐owned Bernese mountain dog with prostatic adenocarcinoma

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To describe robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and report the short-term outcome of a dog with prostatic cancer treated with RARP. Study design: Case report Animals: Client-owned 6-year-old male-neutered Bernese mountain dog. Methods: Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy was performed with a daVinci Si Surgical System through a transperitoneal approach. An interfascial nervesparing approach was used to preserve the neurovascular bundles and increase the likelihood of postoperative urinary continence. Urinary continence was assessed by placing white cloth bedding in the kennel during hospitalization and by owners' observation at home. Results: The console time was 120 minutes, and the estimated intraoperative blood loss was 30 mL. No intraoperative complications were observed. The urinary catheter was removed after 7 days, at which point the dog urinated normally. Peritoneal carcinomatosis was diagnosed 43 days after surgery, and the dog was euthanized. Conclusion: Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy was successfully completed in a dog with prostatic neoplasia and led to postoperative urinary continence. Clinical significance: This single-case report provides evidence to justify further evaluation of RARP in dogs with prostatic neoplasms. 1 | INTRODUCTION Prostatic cancer has a prevalence of 0.2% to 0.6% in the domestic dog population and affects 13% of dogs with prostatic disease. 1,2 No effective curative treatment modality currently exists. A much longer median survival time was described in dogs with prostatic carcinoma receiving cyclooxygenase (COX) inhibitors vs dogs not receiving any treatment (6.9 vs 0.7 months) in one retrospective study. 3 Whereas treatment effect is indisputable because of the over expression of COX-2 in canine prostatic carcinoma cells, 3 the difference in survival times in that study was most likely biased because there was no randomization in treatment groups. Information on the role of radiation therapy for canine prostatic carcinoma in the veterinary literature remains scarce. In a study in A. Schlake and P. Dell'Oglio share first authorship.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

First robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy in a client‐owned Bernese mountain dog with prostatic adenocarcinoma

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recent comparative studies from high-volume centres, showed that RRP, LRP and RARP are all safe options for treating patients with localised prostate cancer, giving similar overall complication rates [16–19] . However, LRP and RALP were associated with less operative blood loss and a lower risk of transfusion than for RRP [16] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: A prospective 2-year single-surgeon experience with 171 cases

Leitão¹,

Papatsoris²,

Mandron³

2012

Arab Journal of Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo assess the safety and the oncological and functional efficacy of a prospective series of extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (ELRP).Patients and methodsThis prospective study included 171 consecutive patients (mean age 62.9 years, SD 6.5) who underwent ELRP by one surgeon between January 2008 and December 2009. The variables analysed were operative duration, blood loss, conversion rate, complications, hospital stay, duration of catheterisation, and the oncological results. We also assessed the rates of continence and erectile function.ResultsThere were no conversions to open surgery. The mean (SD) operative duration was 112.7 (19.4) min, the blood loss was 372.1 (219.1) mL, the hospital stay was 6.8 (2.0) days, and the duration of catheterisation 6.7 (1.5) days. Collectively, 23.4% (40/171) of patients had positive surgical margins. Urinary continence at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months was achieved in 63.3% (95/150), 88.6% (78/88), in 90.3% (121/134) and 92.1% (117/127) of patients, respectively. The respective percentages for physiological erections after nerve-sparing ELRP at the same times were 11.8% (13/110), 11.8% (13/110), 18.2% (20/110) and 25.5% (28/110). The overall potency recovery rates (including patients on pharmacotherapy) were, respectively, 26.4% (29/110), 35.5% (39/110), 52.7% (58/110) and 69.1% (76/110), for the nerve-sparing procedure.ConclusionELRP gave good oncological and functional results, especially in terms of urinary continence.

show abstract

“…Amongst urological surgeons there is a tendency towards seeing robotic RP a ‘gold standard’ for treatment of organ-confined prostate cancer [38] . However, every once in a while we face the situation that a patient refuses surgical or even all treatment due to religious beliefs.…”

Section: Patient-related Factors For Decision-making In the Managemenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-disciplinary and shared decision-making approach in the management of organ-confined prostate cancer

Nazim

Fawzy

Bach

et al. 2018

Arab Journal of Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decision-making in the management of organ-confined prostate cancer is complex as it is based on multi-factorial considerations. It is complicated by a multitude of issues, which are related to the patient, treatment, disease, availability of equipment(s), expertise, and physicians. Combination of all these factors play a major role in the decision-making process and provide for an interactive decision-making preferably in the multi-disciplinary team (MDT) meeting. MDT decisions are comprehensive and are often based on all factors including patients’ biological status, disease and its aggressiveness, and physician and centres’ expertise. However, one important and often under rated factor is patient-related factors. There is considerable evidence that patients and physicians have different goals for treatment and physicians’ understanding of their own patients’ preferences is not accurate. Several patient-related key factors have been identified such as age, religious beliefs, sexual health, educational background, and cognitive impairment. We have focused on these areas and highlight some key factors that need to be taken considered whilst counselling a patient and understanding his choice of treatment, which might not always be match with the clinicians’ recommendation.

show abstract

Robotic radical prostatectomy: The new gold standard

Cited by 15 publications

References 47 publications

First robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy in a client‐owned Bernese mountain dog with prostatic adenocarcinoma

First robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy in a client‐owned Bernese mountain dog with prostatic adenocarcinoma

Extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: A prospective 2-year single-surgeon experience with 171 cases

Multi-disciplinary and shared decision-making approach in the management of organ-confined prostate cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About