Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology 2/2018

01-06-2018 | Review Article

Surgical Management of Organ-Confined Prostate Cancer with Review of Literature and Evolving Evidence

Authors: Ahmed Saeed Goolam, Alfredo Harb-De la Rosa, Murugesan Manoharan

Published in: Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology | Issue 2/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Prostate cancer is the most common solid organ malignancy in men in the USA with an annual incidence of 105 and an annual mortality rate of 19 per 100,000 people. With the advent of PSA screening, the majority of prostate cancer diagnosed is organ confined. Recent studies including the SPCG-4 and PIVOT trials have demonstrated a survival benefit for those undergoing active treatment for localized prostate cancer. The foremost surgical option has been radical prostatectomy (RP). The gold standard has been open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP); however, minimally invasive approaches including laparoscopic and robotic approaches are commonplace and increasing in popularity. We aim to describe the surgical options for the treatment of localized prostate cancer by reviewing the literature. A review of the literature was undertaken using MEDLINE and PubMed. Articles addressing the topic of radical prostatectomy by open, laparoscopic and robotic approaches were selected. Studies comparing the different modalities were also identified. These articles were reviewed for data pertaining to perioperative, oncological and functional outcomes. There is a paucity of randomized studies comparing the three modalities. The published data has demonstrated a benefit in favour of robotically assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) over laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and traditional open RRP in perioperative outcomes. When reviewing the best-reported outcomes for RALP compared to LRP and RRP, operative times are lower (105 vs. 138 vs. 138 min), estimated blood loss rates are lower (111 vs. 200 vs. 300 ml) and blood transfusion rates are lower as in the length of stay (1 vs. 2 vs. 2.3 days) and overall complication rates (4.3 vs. 5 vs. 20%). Similarly, when reviewing functional outcomes, RALP compared to LRP was not inferior. At 12 months, the reported continence was 97 vs. 94 vs. 89% and potency was 94 vs. 77 vs. 90%. In comparative studies, however, these differences did not always meet statistical significance. With respect to oncological outcomes, there was no clear evidence of superiority of one modality over another. RALP is now the most common modality for surgical treatment of organ-confined prostate cancer. Individual series appear to support better perioperative outcomes and perhaps quicker return to functional outcomes. There does not appear to be a clear advantage to date in oncological parameters; however, RALP does not appear to be inferior to either LRP or RRP. It is anticipated that further high quality randomized studies will shed more light on the clinical and statistical significance in the comparison between these modalities.
Literature
1.
go back to reference U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group. United States Cancer Statistics: 1999–2012 incidence and mortality web based report. 2015; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute, Atlanta. Available at. Accessed 22 Sep 2015, 2015. U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group. United States Cancer Statistics: 1999–2012 incidence and mortality web based report. 2015; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute, Atlanta. Available at. Accessed 22 Sep 2015, 2015.
2.
go back to reference Makarov DV, Trock BJ, Humphreys EB et al (2007) Updated nomogram to predict pathologic stage of prostate cancer given prostate-specific antigen level, clinical stage, and biopsy Gleason score (Partin tables) based on cases from 2000 to 2005. Urology 69(6):1095–1101PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Makarov DV, Trock BJ, Humphreys EB et al (2007) Updated nomogram to predict pathologic stage of prostate cancer given prostate-specific antigen level, clinical stage, and biopsy Gleason score (Partin tables) based on cases from 2000 to 2005. Urology 69(6):1095–1101PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Phillip John Gray CCL, Ahmedin Jemal, Jason Alexander Efstathiou. Recent trends in the management of localized prostate cancer: results from the National Cancer Data Base. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32 (5 s):(suppl; abstr 5066) Phillip John Gray CCL, Ahmedin Jemal, Jason Alexander Efstathiou. Recent trends in the management of localized prostate cancer: results from the National Cancer Data Base. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32 (5 s):(suppl; abstr 5066)
4.
go back to reference Sooriakumaran P, Nyberg T, Akre O et al (2014) Comparative effectiveness of radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy in prostate cancer: observational study of mortality outcomes. BMJ 348:g1502PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Sooriakumaran P, Nyberg T, Akre O et al (2014) Comparative effectiveness of radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy in prostate cancer: observational study of mortality outcomes. BMJ 348:g1502PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
5.
6.
go back to reference Young HH (1905) VIII. Conservative perineal prostatectomy: the results of two years’ experience and report of seventy-five cases. Ann Surg 41(4):549–557PubMedPubMedCentral Young HH (1905) VIII. Conservative perineal prostatectomy: the results of two years’ experience and report of seventy-five cases. Ann Surg 41(4):549–557PubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Bivalacqua TJ, Pierorazio PM, Su LM (2009) Open, laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy: optimizing the surgical approach. Surg Oncol 18(3):233–241PubMedCrossRef Bivalacqua TJ, Pierorazio PM, Su LM (2009) Open, laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy: optimizing the surgical approach. Surg Oncol 18(3):233–241PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Sandoval Salinas C, Salinas O, González Rangel AL, Cataño Cataño JG, Fuentes Pachón JC, Castillo Londoño JS (2013) Efficacy of robotic-assisted prostatectomy in localized prostate cancer: a systematic review of clinical trials. Advances in Urology 7:1–6CrossRef Sandoval Salinas C, Salinas O, González Rangel AL, Cataño Cataño JG, Fuentes Pachón JC, Castillo Londoño JS (2013) Efficacy of robotic-assisted prostatectomy in localized prostate cancer: a systematic review of clinical trials. Advances in Urology 7:1–6CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Reiner WG, Walsh PC (1979) An anatomical approach to the surgical management of the dorsal vein and Santorini’s plexus during radical retropubic surgery. J Urol 121(2):198–200PubMedCrossRef Reiner WG, Walsh PC (1979) An anatomical approach to the surgical management of the dorsal vein and Santorini’s plexus during radical retropubic surgery. J Urol 121(2):198–200PubMedCrossRef
10.
11.
go back to reference Walsh PC, Donker PJ (1982) Impotence following radical prostatectomy: insight into etiology and prevention. J Urol 128(3):492–497PubMedCrossRef Walsh PC, Donker PJ (1982) Impotence following radical prostatectomy: insight into etiology and prevention. J Urol 128(3):492–497PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Prasad SM, Gu X, Lavelle R, Lipsitz SR, Hu JC (2011) Comparative effectiveness of perineal vs. retropubic and minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. J Urol 185(1):111–115PubMedCrossRef Prasad SM, Gu X, Lavelle R, Lipsitz SR, Hu JC (2011) Comparative effectiveness of perineal vs. retropubic and minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. J Urol 185(1):111–115PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Tewari A, Srivasatava A, Menon M (2003) A prospective comparison of radical retropubic and robot-assisted prostatectomy: experience in one institution. BJU Int 92(3):205–210PubMedCrossRef Tewari A, Srivasatava A, Menon M (2003) A prospective comparison of radical retropubic and robot-assisted prostatectomy: experience in one institution. BJU Int 92(3):205–210PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Atan A, Tuncel A, Polat F, Balci M, Yesil S, Koseoglu E (2015) Seperation of dorsal vein complex from the urethra by blunt finger dissection during radical retropubic prostatectomy. Turkish Journal of Urology 41(2):108–111PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Atan A, Tuncel A, Polat F, Balci M, Yesil S, Koseoglu E (2015) Seperation of dorsal vein complex from the urethra by blunt finger dissection during radical retropubic prostatectomy. Turkish Journal of Urology 41(2):108–111PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Trinh QD, Sammon J, Sun M et al (2012) Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open radical prostatectomy: results from the nationwide inpatient sample. Eur Urol 61(4):679–685PubMedCrossRef Trinh QD, Sammon J, Sun M et al (2012) Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open radical prostatectomy: results from the nationwide inpatient sample. Eur Urol 61(4):679–685PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Ficarra V, Novara G, Fracalanza S et al (2009) A prospective, non-randomized trial comparing robot-assisted laparoscopic and retropubic radical prostatectomy in one European institution. BJU Int 104(4):534–539PubMedCrossRef Ficarra V, Novara G, Fracalanza S et al (2009) A prospective, non-randomized trial comparing robot-assisted laparoscopic and retropubic radical prostatectomy in one European institution. BJU Int 104(4):534–539PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Mullins JK, Han M, Pierorazio PM, Partin AW, Carter HB (2012) Radical prostatectomy outcome in men 65 years old or older with low risk prostate cancer. J Urol 187(5):1620–1625PubMedCrossRef Mullins JK, Han M, Pierorazio PM, Partin AW, Carter HB (2012) Radical prostatectomy outcome in men 65 years old or older with low risk prostate cancer. J Urol 187(5):1620–1625PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Penson DF, McLerran D, Feng Z et al (2005) 5-year urinary and sexual outcomes after radical prostatectomy: results from the prostate cancer outcomes study. J Urol 173(5):1701–1705PubMedCrossRef Penson DF, McLerran D, Feng Z et al (2005) 5-year urinary and sexual outcomes after radical prostatectomy: results from the prostate cancer outcomes study. J Urol 173(5):1701–1705PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Graefen M, Walz J, Huland H (2006) Open retropubic nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 49(1):38–48PubMedCrossRef Graefen M, Walz J, Huland H (2006) Open retropubic nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 49(1):38–48PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Schuessler WW, Schulam PC, Clayman RV, Vancaille TH (1992) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial case report. J Urol 147(1):246–248CrossRef Schuessler WW, Schulam PC, Clayman RV, Vancaille TH (1992) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial case report. J Urol 147(1):246–248CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Schuessler WW, Schulam PG, Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR (1997) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short-term experience. Urology 50(6):854–857PubMedCrossRef Schuessler WW, Schulam PG, Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR (1997) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short-term experience. Urology 50(6):854–857PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Guillonneau B, Cathelineau X, Barret E, Rozet F, Vallancien G (1998) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Preliminary evaluation after 28 interventions. Presse Med 27(31):1570–1574PubMed Guillonneau B, Cathelineau X, Barret E, Rozet F, Vallancien G (1998) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Preliminary evaluation after 28 interventions. Presse Med 27(31):1570–1574PubMed
23.
go back to reference Guillonneau B, Cathelineau X, Barret E, Rozet F, Vallancien G (1999) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: technical and early oncological assessment of 40 operations. Eur Urol 36(1):14–20PubMedCrossRef Guillonneau B, Cathelineau X, Barret E, Rozet F, Vallancien G (1999) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: technical and early oncological assessment of 40 operations. Eur Urol 36(1):14–20PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Jacob F, Salomon L, Hoznek A et al (2000) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: preliminary results. Eur Urol 37(5):615–620PubMedCrossRef Jacob F, Salomon L, Hoznek A et al (2000) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: preliminary results. Eur Urol 37(5):615–620PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Rassweiler J, Sentker L, Seemann O, Hatzinger M, Stock C, Frede T (2001) Heilbronn laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Technique and results after 100 cases. Eur Urol 40(1):54–64PubMedCrossRef Rassweiler J, Sentker L, Seemann O, Hatzinger M, Stock C, Frede T (2001) Heilbronn laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Technique and results after 100 cases. Eur Urol 40(1):54–64PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Tooher R, Swindle P, Woo H, Miller J, Maddern G (2006) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: a systematic review of comparative studies. J Urol 175(6):2011–2017PubMedCrossRef Tooher R, Swindle P, Woo H, Miller J, Maddern G (2006) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: a systematic review of comparative studies. J Urol 175(6):2011–2017PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Cathcart P, Murphy DG, Moon D, Costello AJ, Frydenberg M (2011) Perioperative, functional and oncological outcomes after open and minimally invasive prostate cancer surgery: experience from Australasia. BJU Int 107(Suppl 3):11–19PubMedCrossRef Cathcart P, Murphy DG, Moon D, Costello AJ, Frydenberg M (2011) Perioperative, functional and oncological outcomes after open and minimally invasive prostate cancer surgery: experience from Australasia. BJU Int 107(Suppl 3):11–19PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Soares R, Di Benedetto A, Dovey Z, Bott S, McGregor RG, Eden CG (2015) Minimum 5-year follow-up of 1138 consecutive laparoscopic radical prostatectomies. BJU Int 115(4):546–553PubMedCrossRef Soares R, Di Benedetto A, Dovey Z, Bott S, McGregor RG, Eden CG (2015) Minimum 5-year follow-up of 1138 consecutive laparoscopic radical prostatectomies. BJU Int 115(4):546–553PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Guazzoni G, Cestari A, Naspro R et al (2006) Intra- and peri-operative outcomes comparing radical retropubic and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: results from a prospective, randomised, single-surgeon study. Eur Urol 50(1):98–104PubMedCrossRef Guazzoni G, Cestari A, Naspro R et al (2006) Intra- and peri-operative outcomes comparing radical retropubic and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: results from a prospective, randomised, single-surgeon study. Eur Urol 50(1):98–104PubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Hellawell GO, Moon DA (2008) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: reducing the learning curve. Urology 72(6):1347–1350PubMedCrossRef Hellawell GO, Moon DA (2008) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: reducing the learning curve. Urology 72(6):1347–1350PubMedCrossRef
31.
go back to reference Hruza M, Bermejo JL, Flinspach B et al (2013) Long-term oncological outcomes after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 111(2):271–280PubMedCrossRef Hruza M, Bermejo JL, Flinspach B et al (2013) Long-term oncological outcomes after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 111(2):271–280PubMedCrossRef
32.
go back to reference Wilson LC, Kennett KM, Gilling PJ (2004) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: early safety and efficacy. ANZ J Surg 74(12):1065–1068PubMedCrossRef Wilson LC, Kennett KM, Gilling PJ (2004) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: early safety and efficacy. ANZ J Surg 74(12):1065–1068PubMedCrossRef
33.
go back to reference Patel V, Samavedi S (2014) Prostate cancer: superior outcomes after a long learning curve with RARP. Nature Reviews Urology 11(3):140–141PubMedCrossRef Patel V, Samavedi S (2014) Prostate cancer: superior outcomes after a long learning curve with RARP. Nature Reviews Urology 11(3):140–141PubMedCrossRef
34.
go back to reference Asimakopoulos AD, Pereira Fraga CT, Annino F, Pasqualetti P, Calado AA, Mugnier C (2011) Randomized comparison between laparoscopic and robot-assisted nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. J Sex Med 8(5):1503–1512PubMedCrossRef Asimakopoulos AD, Pereira Fraga CT, Annino F, Pasqualetti P, Calado AA, Mugnier C (2011) Randomized comparison between laparoscopic and robot-assisted nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. J Sex Med 8(5):1503–1512PubMedCrossRef
35.
go back to reference Porpiglia F, Morra I, Lucci Chiarissi M et al (2013) Randomised controlled trial comparing laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 63(4):606–614PubMedCrossRef Porpiglia F, Morra I, Lucci Chiarissi M et al (2013) Randomised controlled trial comparing laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 63(4):606–614PubMedCrossRef
36.
go back to reference Thompson JE, Egger S, Bohm M et al (2014) Superior quality of life and improved surgical margins are achievable with robotic radical prostatectomy after a long learning curve: a prospective single-surgeon study of 1552 consecutive cases. Eur Urol 65(3):521–531PubMedCrossRef Thompson JE, Egger S, Bohm M et al (2014) Superior quality of life and improved surgical margins are achievable with robotic radical prostatectomy after a long learning curve: a prospective single-surgeon study of 1552 consecutive cases. Eur Urol 65(3):521–531PubMedCrossRef
37.
go back to reference Patel VR, Palmer KJ, Coughlin G, Samavedi S (2008) Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: perioperative outcomes of 1500 cases. J Endourol 22(10):2299–2305PubMedCrossRef Patel VR, Palmer KJ, Coughlin G, Samavedi S (2008) Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: perioperative outcomes of 1500 cases. J Endourol 22(10):2299–2305PubMedCrossRef
38.
go back to reference Patel VR, Coelho RF, Palmer KJ, Rocco B (2009) Periurethral suspension stitch during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of the technique and continence outcomes. Eur Urol 56(3):472–478PubMedCrossRef Patel VR, Coelho RF, Palmer KJ, Rocco B (2009) Periurethral suspension stitch during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of the technique and continence outcomes. Eur Urol 56(3):472–478PubMedCrossRef
39.
go back to reference Parsons JK, Bennett JL (2008) Outcomes of retropubic, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted prostatectomy. Urology 72(2):412–416PubMedCrossRef Parsons JK, Bennett JL (2008) Outcomes of retropubic, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted prostatectomy. Urology 72(2):412–416PubMedCrossRef
40.
go back to reference Healy KA, Gomella LG (2013) Retropubic, laparoscopic, or robotic radical prostatectomy: is there any real difference? Semin Oncol 40(3):286–296PubMedCrossRef Healy KA, Gomella LG (2013) Retropubic, laparoscopic, or robotic radical prostatectomy: is there any real difference? Semin Oncol 40(3):286–296PubMedCrossRef
41.
go back to reference Frota R, Turna B, Barros R, Gill IS (2008) Comparison of radical prostatectomy techniques: open, laparoscopic and robotic assisted. International Braz J Urol 34(3):259–268 discussion 268-259PubMedCrossRef Frota R, Turna B, Barros R, Gill IS (2008) Comparison of radical prostatectomy techniques: open, laparoscopic and robotic assisted. International Braz J Urol 34(3):259–268 discussion 268-259PubMedCrossRef
42.
go back to reference Klein EA, Bianco FJ, Serio AM et al (2008) Surgeon experience is strongly associated with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy for all preoperative risk categories. J Urol 179(6):2212–2216 discussion 2216-2217PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Klein EA, Bianco FJ, Serio AM et al (2008) Surgeon experience is strongly associated with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy for all preoperative risk categories. J Urol 179(6):2212–2216 discussion 2216-2217PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
43.
go back to reference Menon M, Tewari A, Baize B, Guillonneau B, Vallancien G (2002) Prospective comparison of radical retropubic prostatectomy and robot-assisted anatomic prostatectomy: the Vattikuti Urology Institute experience. Urology 60(5):864–868PubMedCrossRef Menon M, Tewari A, Baize B, Guillonneau B, Vallancien G (2002) Prospective comparison of radical retropubic prostatectomy and robot-assisted anatomic prostatectomy: the Vattikuti Urology Institute experience. Urology 60(5):864–868PubMedCrossRef
44.
go back to reference Bhayani SB, Pavlovich CP, Hsu TS, Sullivan W, Su L (2003) Prospective comparison of short-term convalescence: laparoscopic radical prostatectomy vs. open radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 61(3):612–616PubMedCrossRef Bhayani SB, Pavlovich CP, Hsu TS, Sullivan W, Su L (2003) Prospective comparison of short-term convalescence: laparoscopic radical prostatectomy vs. open radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 61(3):612–616PubMedCrossRef
45.
go back to reference Papachristos A, Basto M, Te Marvelde L, Moon D (2015) Laparoscopic vs. robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: an Australian single-surgeon series. ANZ J Surg 85(3):154–158PubMedCrossRef Papachristos A, Basto M, Te Marvelde L, Moon D (2015) Laparoscopic vs. robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: an Australian single-surgeon series. ANZ J Surg 85(3):154–158PubMedCrossRef
46.
go back to reference Badani KK, Kaul S, Menon M (2007) Evolution of robotic radical prostatectomy: assessment after 2766 procedures. Cancer 110(9):1951–1958PubMedCrossRef Badani KK, Kaul S, Menon M (2007) Evolution of robotic radical prostatectomy: assessment after 2766 procedures. Cancer 110(9):1951–1958PubMedCrossRef
47.
go back to reference Zorn KC, Gofrit ON, Orvieto MA et al (2007) Da Vinci robot error and failure rates: single institution experience on a single three-arm robot unit of more than 700 consecutive robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomies. J Endourol 21(11):1341–1344PubMedCrossRef Zorn KC, Gofrit ON, Orvieto MA et al (2007) Da Vinci robot error and failure rates: single institution experience on a single three-arm robot unit of more than 700 consecutive robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomies. J Endourol 21(11):1341–1344PubMedCrossRef
48.
go back to reference Smith JA Jr, Chan RC, Chang SS et al (2007) A comparison of the incidence and location of positive surgical margins in robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and open retropubic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 178(6):2385–2389 discussion 2389-2390PubMedCrossRef Smith JA Jr, Chan RC, Chang SS et al (2007) A comparison of the incidence and location of positive surgical margins in robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and open retropubic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 178(6):2385–2389 discussion 2389-2390PubMedCrossRef
49.
go back to reference Allan C, Ilic D. Laparoscopic vs. robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localised prostate cancer: a systematic review. Urol Int. Jul 18 2015. Allan C, Ilic D. Laparoscopic vs. robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localised prostate cancer: a systematic review. Urol Int. Jul 18 2015.
50.
go back to reference Sandoval Salinas C, Gonzalez Rangel AL, Catano Catano JG, Fuentes Pachon JC, Castillo Londono JS (2013) Efficacy of robotic-assisted prostatectomy in localized prostate cancer: a systematic review of clinical trials. Adv Urol 2013:105651PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Sandoval Salinas C, Gonzalez Rangel AL, Catano Catano JG, Fuentes Pachon JC, Castillo Londono JS (2013) Efficacy of robotic-assisted prostatectomy in localized prostate cancer: a systematic review of clinical trials. Adv Urol 2013:105651PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
51.
go back to reference Han M, Partin AW, Zahurak M, Piantadosi S, Epstein JI, Walsh PC (2003) Biochemical (prostate specific antigen) recurrence probability following radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 169(2):517–523PubMedCrossRef Han M, Partin AW, Zahurak M, Piantadosi S, Epstein JI, Walsh PC (2003) Biochemical (prostate specific antigen) recurrence probability following radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 169(2):517–523PubMedCrossRef
52.
go back to reference Bianco FJ Jr, Scardino PT, Eastham JA (2005) Radical prostatectomy: long-term cancer control and recovery of sexual and urinary function (“trifecta”). Urology 66(5 Suppl):83–94PubMedCrossRef Bianco FJ Jr, Scardino PT, Eastham JA (2005) Radical prostatectomy: long-term cancer control and recovery of sexual and urinary function (“trifecta”). Urology 66(5 Suppl):83–94PubMedCrossRef
53.
go back to reference Guillonneau B, El-Fettouh H, Baumert H et al (2003) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncological evaluation after 1,000 cases a Montsouris Institute. J Urol 169(4):1261–1266PubMedCrossRef Guillonneau B, El-Fettouh H, Baumert H et al (2003) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncological evaluation after 1,000 cases a Montsouris Institute. J Urol 169(4):1261–1266PubMedCrossRef
54.
go back to reference Hakimi AA, Blitstein J, Feder M, Shapiro E, Ghavamian R (2009) Direct comparison of surgical and functional outcomes of robotic-assisted vs. pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: single-surgeon experience. Urology 73(1):119–123PubMedCrossRef Hakimi AA, Blitstein J, Feder M, Shapiro E, Ghavamian R (2009) Direct comparison of surgical and functional outcomes of robotic-assisted vs. pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: single-surgeon experience. Urology 73(1):119–123PubMedCrossRef
55.
go back to reference Barocas DA, Mitchell R, Chang SS, Cookson MS (2010) Impact of surgeon and hospital volume on outcomes of radical prostatectomy. Urol Oncol 28(3):243–250PubMedCrossRef Barocas DA, Mitchell R, Chang SS, Cookson MS (2010) Impact of surgeon and hospital volume on outcomes of radical prostatectomy. Urol Oncol 28(3):243–250PubMedCrossRef
56.
go back to reference Alibhai SM, Leach M, Tomlinson G (2008) Impact of hospital and surgeon volume on mortality and complications after prostatectomy. J Urol 180(1):155–162 discussion 162-153PubMedCrossRef Alibhai SM, Leach M, Tomlinson G (2008) Impact of hospital and surgeon volume on mortality and complications after prostatectomy. J Urol 180(1):155–162 discussion 162-153PubMedCrossRef
57.
go back to reference Begg CB, Riedel ER, Bach PB et al (2002) Variations in morbidity after radical prostatectomy. N Engl J Med 346(15):1138–1144PubMedCrossRef Begg CB, Riedel ER, Bach PB et al (2002) Variations in morbidity after radical prostatectomy. N Engl J Med 346(15):1138–1144PubMedCrossRef
58.
go back to reference Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A et al (2002) Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes. J Urol 168(3):945–949PubMedCrossRef Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A et al (2002) Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes. J Urol 168(3):945–949PubMedCrossRef
59.
go back to reference Doumerc N, Yuen C, Savdie R et al (2010) Should experienced open prostatic surgeons convert to robotic surgery? The real learning curve for one surgeon over 3 years. BJU Int 106(3):378–384PubMedCrossRef Doumerc N, Yuen C, Savdie R et al (2010) Should experienced open prostatic surgeons convert to robotic surgery? The real learning curve for one surgeon over 3 years. BJU Int 106(3):378–384PubMedCrossRef
60.
go back to reference Finkelstein J, Eckersberger E, Sadri H, Taneja SS, Lepor H, Djavan B (2010) Open vs. laparoscopic vs. robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: the European and US experience. Rev Urol 12(1):35–43PubMedPubMedCentral Finkelstein J, Eckersberger E, Sadri H, Taneja SS, Lepor H, Djavan B (2010) Open vs. laparoscopic vs. robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: the European and US experience. Rev Urol 12(1):35–43PubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Surgical Management of Organ-Confined Prostate Cancer with Review of Literature and Evolving Evidence
Authors
Ahmed Saeed Goolam
Alfredo Harb-De la Rosa
Murugesan Manoharan
Publication date
01-06-2018
Publisher
Springer India
Published in
Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology / Issue 2/2018
Print ISSN: 0975-7651
Electronic ISSN: 0976-6952
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13193-016-0594-1

Other articles of this Issue 2/2018

Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology 2/2018 Go to the issue