Top

World Journal of Urology

Published in:

01-06-2013 | Original Article

Long-term oncological and functional results of extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: one surgical team’s experience on 1,600 consecutive cases

Authors: Paolo Verze, Salvatore Scuzzarella, Giorgio R. Martina, Pierluigi Giummelli, Federico Cantoni, Vincenzo Mirone

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 3/2013

Abstract

Purpose

To determine the oncologic and functional outcomes of ELRP on a single surgical team’s series.

Methods

A total of 1,600 consecutive ELRP patients were recorded with a 2-year follow-up. In 778 patients, a 5-year follow-up was available.

Results

The mean operative time was 125,6 min (PLND not included) and 150,9 min (PLND included). Postoperative stage was pT2a in 282 patients (17.6 %), pT2b in 877 (54.8 %), pT2c in 18 (1.1 %), pT3a in 241 (15 %), and pT3b in 182 (11.3 %). Positive margins were detected in 7.4 and 13.4 % of pT2 and pT3 tumors, respectively. Overall complication rate was 4 %. PSA levels resulted in <0.2 ng/mL in 96.4, 94.9, 92, 90.9, and 81.5 % of the cases at 3, 12, 24, 36, and 60 months after surgery, respectively. BCRFS rates 5 years after ELRP were 88.7 % for patients staged as pT2, 73.9 % for pT3a, and 62.4 % for pT3b. Complete urinary continence rate resulted in 39 and 92 % after 1 and 12 months, respectively, with a further increase from 92 to 98.4 % at 24-month follow-up. A nerve-sparing procedure was performed in 45 % of patients. The overall potency rate at 12-month follow-up was 38.67 % for UNSS patients and 75 % for BNSS patients. Potency recovery was age-dependent, with patients aged <55 years who resulted potent in 46.8 % of UNSS and 95.8 % of BNSS after 24 months.

Conclusions

ELRP is a standardized and safe procedure that implies advantages of both minimally invasive and extraperitoneal approaches with elevated standards for oncologic and functional outcomes obtained at long-term follow-up.

Schuessler WW, Shulam PG, Clayman RV et al (1997) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short term experience. Urology 50:854–857PubMedCrossRef

Raboy A, Ferzli G, Albert P (1997) Initial experience with extraperitoneal endoscopic radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 50:849–853PubMedCrossRef

Guillonneau B, Cathelineau X, Barret E, Rozet F, Val-lancien G (1999) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: technical and early oncological assessment of 40 operations. Eur Urol 36:14–20PubMedCrossRef

Guillonneau B, El-Fettouh H, Baumert H et al (2003) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncological evaluation after 1,000 cases at Montsouris Institute. J Urol 169:1261–1266PubMedCrossRef

Kowalczyk KJ, Yu H, Ulmer W et al (2012) Outcomes assessment in men undergoing open retropubic radical prostatectomy, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. World J Urol 30(1):85–89PubMedCrossRef

Salomon L, Levrel O, de la Taille A et al (2002) Radical prostatectomy by the retropubic, perineal and laparoscopic approach: 12 years of experience in one center. Eur Urol 42:104–110PubMedCrossRef

Bollens R, Vanden Bossche M, Roumeguere T, Damoun A, Ekane S, Hoffmann P, Zlotta AR, Schulman CC (2001) Extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Results after 50 cases. Eur Urol 40(1):65–69PubMedCrossRef

Rassweiler J, Stolzenburg J, Sulser T, Deger S, Zumbé J, Hofmockel G et al (2006) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy—the experience of the German Laparoscopic Working Group. Eur Urol 49:113–119PubMedCrossRef

Touijer K, Guillonneau B (2006) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a critical analysis of surgical quality. Eur Urol 49(4):625–632PubMedCrossRef

10.

Hoznek A, Salomon L, Olsson LE, Antiphon P, Saint F, Cicco A, Chopin D, Abbou CC (2001) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The Créteil experience. Eur Urol 40(1):38–45PubMedCrossRef

11.

Martina GR, Giumelli P, Scuzzarella S, Remotti M, Caruso G, Lovisolo J (2005) Laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy—learning curve of a laparoscopy-naive urologist in a community hospital. Urology 65(5):959–963PubMedCrossRef

12.

Rozet F, Galiano M, Cathelineau X, Barret E, Cathala N, Vallancien G (2005) Extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a prospective evaluation of 600 cases. J Urol 174:908–911PubMedCrossRef

13.

Stolzenburg JU, Rabenalt R, Do M, Truss MC, Burchardt M, Herrmann TR, Schwalenberg T, Kallidonis P, Liatsikos EN (2007) Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy: the University of Leipzig experience of 1,300 cases. World J Urol 25(1):45–51PubMedCrossRef

14.

Stolzenburg JU, Rabenalt R, DO M, Ho K, Dorschner W, Waldkirch E, Jonas U, Schütz A, Horn L, Truss MC (2005) Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy: oncological and functional results after 700 procedures. J Urol 174(4Pt 1):1271–1275PubMedCrossRef

15.

Paul A, Ploussard G, Nicolaiew N, Xylinas E, Gillion N, de la Taille A, Vordos D, Hoznek A, Yiou R, Abbou CC, Salomon L (2010) Oncologic outcome after extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: midterm follow-up of 1,115 procedures. Eur Urol 57(2):267–272PubMedCrossRef

16.

Rassweiler J, Seemann O, Schulze M, Teber D, Hatzinger M, Frede T (2003) Laparoscopic versus open radical prostatectomy: a comparative study at a single institution. J Urol 169:1689PubMedCrossRef

17.

Guillonneau B, Rozet F, Cathelineau X, Lay F, Barret E, Doublet JD, Baumert H, Vallancien G (2002) Perioperative complications of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris 3-year experience. J Urol 167:51PubMedCrossRef

18.

Herrmann TR, Rabenalt R, Stolzenburg JU et al (2007) Oncological and functional results of open, robot-assisted and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: does surgical approach and surgical experience matter? World J Urol 25:149–160PubMedCrossRef

19.

Busch J, Stephan C, Klutzny A et al (2012) Impact of positive surgical margins on oncological outcome following laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP): long-term results. World J Urol. [Epub ahead of print]

20.

Porpiglia F, Fiori C, Manfredi M et al (2012) Surgical margin status of specimen and oncological outcomes after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: experience after 400 procedures. World J Urol 30(2):245–250PubMedCrossRef

21.

Hruza M, Bermejo JL, Flinspach B, et al. (2013) Long-term oncological outcomes after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 111(2):271–280

22.

Kowalczyk KJ, Yu HY, Ulmer W, Williams SB, Hu JC (2012) Outcomes assessment in men undergoing open retropubic radical prostatectomy, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. World J Urol 30(1):85–89PubMedCrossRef

23.

Georgiou AN, Rassweiler J, Herrmann TR et al (2012) Evolution and simplified terminology of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES), laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS), and mini-laparoscopy (ML). World J Urol 30(5):573–580PubMedCrossRef

24.

Nagele U, Anastasiadis AG, Walcher U et al (2012) Natural orifice (NOTES) transurethral sutureless radical prostatectomy with thulium laser support: first patient report. World J Urol 30(5):625–631PubMedCrossRef

Title: Long-term oncological and functional results of extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: one surgical team’s experience on 1,600 consecutive cases
Authors: Paolo Verze
Salvatore Scuzzarella
Giorgio R. Martina
Pierluigi Giummelli
Federico Cantoni
Vincenzo Mirone
Publication date: 01-06-2013
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: World Journal of Urology / Issue 3/2013
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-013-1052-0

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Long-term oncological and functional results of extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: one surgical team’s experience on 1,600 consecutive cases

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2013

Prolapse surgery in octogenarians: are we pushing the limits too far?

Penile prosthesis implantation for the treatment for male erectile dysfunction: clinical outcomes and lessons learnt after 955 procedures

Lower urinary tract symptoms in relation to region of birth in 95,393 men living in Australia: the 45 and Up Study

Effect of minimizing tension during robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy on urinary function recovery

Publication misrepresentation among urology residency applicants

Functional outcomes following robotic prostatectomy using athermal, traction free risk-stratified grades of nerve sparing