Top

BMC Urology

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2014 | Research article

Comparison of surgical technique (Open vs. Laparoscopic) on pathological and long term functional outcomes following radical prostatectomy

Authors: Ahmed Magheli, Jonas Busch, Natalia Leva, Mark Schrader, Serdar Deger, Kurt Miller, Michael Lein

Published in: BMC Urology | Issue 1/2014

Abstract

Background

Few studies to date have directly compared outcomes of retropubic (RRP) and laparoscopic (LRP) radical prostatectomy. We investigated a single institution experience with RRP and LRP with respect to functional and pathological outcomes.

Methods

168 patients who underwent RRP were compared to 171 patients who underwent LRP at our institution. Pathological and functional outcomes including postoperative urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction (ED) of the two cohorts were examined.

Results

Patients had bilateral, unilateral and no nerve sparing technique performed in 83.3%, 1.8% and 14.9% of cases for RRP and 23.4%, 22.8% and 53.8% of cases for LRP, respectively (p < 0.001). Overall positive surgical margin rates were 22.2% among patients who underwent RRP compared to 26.5% of patients who underwent LRP (p = 0.435). Based upon pads/day, urinary continence postoperatively was achieved in 83.2% and 82.8% for RRP and LRP, respectively (p = 0.872). Analysis on postoperative ED was limited due to lack of information on the preoperative erectile status. However, postoperatively there were no differences with respect to ED between the two cohorts (p = 0.151). Based on ICIQ-scores, surgeons with more experience had lower rates of postoperative incontinence irrespective of surgical technique (p = 0.001 and p < 0.001 for continuous and stratified data, respectively).

Conclusions

RRP and LRP represent effective surgical approaches for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. Pathological outcomes are excellent for both surgical techniques. Functional outcomes including postoperative urinary incontinence and ED are comparable between the cohorts. Surgeon experience is more relevant than surgical technique applied.

Walsh PC: Nerve sparing radical prostatectomy for early stage prostate cancer. Semin Oncol. 1988, 15 (4): 351-358.PubMed

Hernandez DJ, Epstein JI, Trock BJ, Tsuzuki T, Carter HB, Walsh PC: Radical retropubic prostatectomy. How often do experienced surgeons have positive surgical margins when there is extraprostatic extension in the region of the neurovascular bundle?. J Urol. 2005, 173 (2): 446-449. 10.1097/01.ju.0000151135.80249.c9.CrossRefPubMed

Imkamp F, Herrmann TR, Rassweiler J, Sulser T, Stolzenburg JU, Rabenalt R, Jonas U, Burchardt M: Laparoscopy in German urology: changing acceptance among urologists. Eur Urol. 2009, 56 (6): 1074-1080. 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.09.064.CrossRefPubMed

Rassweiler J, Hruza M, Teber D, Su LM: Laparoscopic and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy–critical analysis of the results. Eur Urol. 2006, 49 (4): 612-624. 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.12.054.CrossRefPubMed

Lein M, Stibane I, Mansour R, Hege C, Roigas J, Wille A, Jung K, Kristiansen G, Schnorr D, Loening SA, et al: Complications, urinary continence, and oncologic outcome of 1000 laparoscopic transperitoneal radical prostatectomies-experience at the Charite Hospital Berlin, Campus Mitte. Eur Urol. 2006, 50 (6): 1278-1282. 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.06.023. discussion 1283–1274CrossRefPubMed

Descazeaud A, Peyromaure M, Zerbib M: Will robotic surgery become the gold standard for radical prostatectomy?. Eur Urol. 2007, 51 (1): 9-11. 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.10.007.CrossRefPubMed

Ahlering TE, Skarecky D, Lee D, Clayman RV: Successful transfer of open surgical skills to a laparoscopic environment using a robotic interface: initial experience with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2003, 170 (5): 1738-1741. 10.1097/01.ju.0000092881.24608.5e.CrossRefPubMed

Vickers AJ, Savage CJ, Hruza M, Tuerk I, Koenig P, Martinez-Pineiro L, Janetschek G, Guillonneau B: The surgical learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2009, 10 (5): 475-480. 10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70079-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Anastasiadis AG, Salomon L, Katz R, Hoznek A, Chopin D, Abbou CC: Radical retropubic versus laparoscopic prostatectomy: a prospective comparison of functional outcome. Urology. 2003, 62 (2): 292-297. 10.1016/S0090-4295(03)00352-2.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Rassweiler J, Seemann O, Schulze M, Teber D, Hatzinger M, Frede T: Laparoscopic versus open radical prostatectomy: a comparative study at a single institution. J Urol. 2003, 169 (5): 1689-1693. 10.1097/01.ju.0000062614.56629.41.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Ficarra V, Novara G, Artibani W, Cestari A, Galfano A, Graefen M, Guazzoni G, Guillonneau B, Menon M, Montorsi F, et al: Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol. 2009, 55 (5): 1037-1063. 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.01.036.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Guazzoni G, Cestari A, Naspro R, Riva M, Centemero A, Zanoni M, Rigatti L, Rigatti P: Intra- and peri-operative outcomes comparing radical retropubic and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: results from a prospective, randomised, single-surgeon study. Eur Urol. 2006, 50 (1): 98-104. 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.02.051.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Poulakis V, Witzsch U, de Vries R, Dillenburg W, Becht E: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in men older than 70 years of age with localized prostate cancer: comparison of morbidity, reconvalescence, and short-term clinical outcomes between younger and older men. Eur Urol. 2007, 51 (5): 1341-1348. 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.12.013. discussion 1349CrossRefPubMed

14.

Touijer K, Eastham JA, Secin FP, Romero Otero J, Serio A, Stasi J, Sanchez-Salas R, Vickers A, Reuter VE, Scardino PT, et al: Comprehensive prospective comparative analysis of outcomes between open and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy conducted in 2003 to 2005. J Urol. 2008, 179 (5): 1811-1817. 10.1016/j.juro.2008.01.026. discussion 1817CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Coelho RF, Palmer KJ, Rocco B, Moniz RR, Chauhan S, Orvieto MA, Coughlin G, Patel VR: Early complication rates in a single-surgeon series of 2500 robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies: report applying a standardized grading system. Eur Urol. 2010, 57 (6): 945-952. 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.02.001.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Vickers AJ, Bianco FJ, Gonen M, Cronin AM, Eastham JA, Schrag D, Klein EA, Reuther AM, Kattan MW, Pontes JE, et al: Effects of pathologic stage on the learning curve for radical prostatectomy: evidence that recurrence in organ-confined cancer is largely related to inadequate surgical technique. Eur Urol. 2008, 53 (5): 960-966. 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.01.005.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Kessler TM, Burkhard FC, Studer UE: Nerve-sparing open radical retropubic prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2007, 51 (1): 90-97. 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.10.013.CrossRefPubMed

The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2490/14/18/prepub

Title: Comparison of surgical technique (Open vs. Laparoscopic) on pathological and long term functional outcomes following radical prostatectomy
Authors: Ahmed Magheli
Jonas Busch
Natalia Leva
Mark Schrader
Serdar Deger
Kurt Miller
Michael Lein
Publication date: 01-12-2014
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: BMC Urology / Issue 1/2014
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2490
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2490-14-18

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Comparison of surgical technique (Open vs. Laparoscopic) on pathological and long term functional outcomes following radical prostatectomy

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2014

Pure intracorporeal laparoscopic radical cystectomy with orthotopic “U” shaped ileal neobladder

Organ-specific and tumor-size-dependent responses to sunitinib in clear cell renal cell carcinoma

Renal cell carcinoma with intramyocardial metastases

Disease-specific outcomes of Radical Prostatectomies in Northern Norway; a case for the impact of perineural infiltration and postoperative PSA-doubling time

The MAPP research network: a novel study of urologic chronic pelvic pain syndromes

Comparison of the simplified International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) in patients of erectile dysfunction with different pathophysiologies