UROLOGICAL ONCOLOGY Radical perineal prostatectomy – the contemporary resurgence of a genuinely minimally invasive procedure: Procedure outline. Comparison of the advantages, disadvantages, and outcomes of different surgical techniques of treating organ-confined prostate cancer (PCa). A literature review with special focus on perineal prostatectomy

Wroński, Stanisław

doi:10.5173/ceju.2012.04.art2

Cited by 16 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The purpose of surgery is to achieve radical resection. so far, several studies have compared the effects of RPP and other methods on intraoperative tumor control [17] . Mirza reported that the incidence of surgical margin positive PSM in RPP, RRP and RARP was 22.8%, 28.9% and 13.6%, respectively(p=0.007) [18] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single-Port Robot-Assisted Perineal Radical Prostatectomy: Our Initial Experience

Huang¹,

Wu²,

Li³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To evaluate the clinical value of robot-assisted perineal radical prostatectomy (RPRP) in the treatment of early localized prostate cancer.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 3 consecutive patients diagnosed with prostate cancer from January 2020 to May 2020 who received RPRP in our center. The main outcomes assessed were operating time, perioperative complications and need for conversion to open surgery. Results: 3 patients successfully underwent RPRP with no conversion to open surgery. No intra-operative complications were seen. Average operative time was 201.67±61.53 min, console time was131.67±32.53 min, with an estimated blood loss of 183.33±28.87mL. 2 patients were discharged within 10 days postoperatively with perineal drainages removed. The Foley catheter was removed 2 weeks after surgery. One patient had a positive surgical margin (33.3%). 2 patients were continent immediately after removal of the Foley catheter, 1 patient was continent 1 month postoperatively. The sexual function of 2 patients recovered within 1 month and 1 patient recovered within 3 months. The PSA reexamination was 0-0.1µg/L one month after operation.Conclusion: For patients with early localized prostate cancer, robot-assisted perineal radical prostatectomy is a safe and effective method, and has outstanding advantages in radical tumor resection and postoperative urine control.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single-Port Robot-Assisted Perineal Radical Prostatectomy: Our Initial Experience

Huang¹,

Wu²,

Li³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A Clavien IIIb case might be represented by double‐J catheter placement for hydronephrosis, repair of ureteral injury or bleeding managed by nephrectomy, as they all are interventions under general anaesthesia, whereas the present medical condition is not a leading matter . In the case of colonic perforation; for example, during radical prostatectomy, early surgery (Clavien IIIb) might be better for the patient than conservative management using total paraenteral nutrition and IV antibiotics (Clavien II) . Other differences could be the result of various procedures regarding intensive care unit admission (grade III‐b vs IV) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interobserver variability of Clavien–Dindo scoring in urology

Poletajew

Zapała²,

Piotrowicz³

et al. 2014

Int J of Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abbreviations & AcronymsObjectives: To assess the interobserver variability of Clavien-Dindo scoring in urology. Methods: A thematic survey was carried out simultaneously in nine Polish urological centers among 171 responders -81 urologists and 90 urologists-in-training, made up of 16 women and 155 men. After Clavien-Dindo classification was presented, respondents were asked to grade nine typical urological complications according to Clavien-Dindo classification. Interobserver agreement, reproducibility of answers, as well as the influencing factors were analyzed. Questions in the survey related to complications of variable severity after basic urological operations, including four open, one laparoscopic and four endourological. Results: Agreement on the grade of complication was moderate (κ = 0.45) and it was noticed in 69% of respondents (range 38-87%). No effect of surgical approach (classic vs endoscopic, 70% vs 67%, P = 0.64), or physician professional experience (resident vs urologist, 71% vs 66%, P = 0.77) was observed. The most significant discrepancies were found in cases of local complications after transurethral surgery (accordance in 39%) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (accordance in 55%), and in cases of severe general complications after Bricker operation (accordance in 58%). Conclusions:The variability of Clavien-Dindo classification scoring among urologists is significant. Thus, the Clavien-Dindo classification might require detailing before its eventual implementation in urology, together with appropriate training of specialists. However, despite some disadvantages, the simplicity, reproducibility and logical scheme of the Clavien-Dindo classification make it a promising tool for quality assessment in different fields of urology.

show abstract

“…These include faster recovery times, less blood loss, and pain and the catheter can be removed earlier on than with open prostatectomies [44]. Wroński (2012) states that the risk of wound infection in laparoscopic radical prostatectomies is approximately 1% [45]. For the most part, a laparoscopic radical prostatectomy has been replaced by a robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP): the most common type of prostate cancer surgery done today [3].…”

Section: Figure 5: Different Methods Of Prostatectomymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite the type of procedure done, Wroński (2012) notes that the list of adverse effects of a prostatectomy seems to remain the same [45]. The only thing that differs is that when doing a radical prostatectomy, the entire cancer is removed.…”

Section: Figure 5: Different Methods Of Prostatectomymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Open prostatectomies are more likely to warrant a longer stay in hospital settings, post-surgery, and require a greater amount of time allocated towards healing. Furthermore, according to Wroński (2012), the risk of wound infection is approximately 5% to 9% in open prostatectomy procedures [45]. If there's reason to believe that cancer has spread to the lymph nodes, the surgeon will also go ahead and remove the lymph nodes in the vicinity of the prostate gland [43,44].…”

Section: Surgical Treatment/managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Comprehensive Review of Pharmaceutical and Surgical Interventions of Prostate Cancer

Kaler

Hussain

Haque

et al. 2020

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the second most common cause of death amongst men in the United States, prostate cancer is a type of cancer that is known to develop and originate in the prostate gland. The main function of the prostate gland is to produce seminal fluid in which the sperm bathes. The seminal fluids are necessary for allowing the sperm to move easily through the urethra and also allows successful fertilization by providing an alkaline environment for the sperm in the acidic nature of the vagina. The seminal vesicles are two smaller glands that are attached to either side of the prostate gland and in radical prostatectomies, can get removed. In the event that the seminal vesicles are removed during a radical prostatectomy, the individual is unable to produce any seminal fluids and thus, becoming infertile. Prostate cancer is most commonly seen in patients over the age of 66 years, however, in the presence of predisposing risk factors, may occur as early as in the late 40s. Certain risk factors may speed the presentation of prostate cancer in individuals and thus, mandatory screening is recommended around the age of 45. If no risk factors are present, screening is recommended to begin after the age of 50 years. Screening for prostate cancer is focused on looking for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in a blood test, though this may not be the most reliable method. The method of diagnosis stems from further testing done following an abnormal PSA test. A digital rectal examination and ultrasonography may also be used to assist with the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Though there are several different types of pharmaceutical interventions currently present in the eradication of prostate cancer, with androgen deprivation therapy being the most commonly used, surgical interventions may be utilized to completely resect cancer from an individual. Different radical prostatectomies are used; the appropriate approach utilized is dependent on the extensiveness of cancer and the type of cancer that is present.

show abstract

Cited by 16 publications

References 56 publications

Single-Port Robot-Assisted Perineal Radical Prostatectomy: Our Initial Experience

Single-Port Robot-Assisted Perineal Radical Prostatectomy: Our Initial Experience

Interobserver variability of Clavien–Dindo scoring in urology

A Comprehensive Review of Pharmaceutical and Surgical Interventions of Prostate Cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About