FUNCTIONAL RESULTS OF ENDOSCOPIC EXTRAPERITONEAL RADICAL INTRAFASCIAL PROSTATECTOMY
https://doi.org/10.21886/2308-6424-2018-6-1-18-26
Abstract
Introduction. Endoscopic radical prostatectomy is a highly effective treatment for localized prostate cancer. Intrafascial prostate dissection ensures early recovery of urine continence function and erectile function. This article sums up our own experience of performing intrafascial endoscopic prostatectomy.
Materials and methods. 68 patients have undergone this procedure.
Results. 12 months after surgery 88.2 % of the patients were fully continent, 11.7 % had symptoms of minimal stress urinary incontinence. We encountered no cases of positive surgical margins and two case of biochemical recurrence of the disease.
Conclusion. Oncologically intrafascial endoscopic radical prostatectomy is as effective as other modifications of radical prostatectomy and has the benefits of early recovery of urine continence function and erectile function.
About the Authors
D. V. Perlin
Volgograd State Medical University;
Volgograd Regional Center of Urology and Nephrology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
MD, PhD, Professor and Head of the Department of Urology, Nephrology and Transplantology, Faculty for Postgraduate Training of Healthcare Workers,
Volgograd
V. P. Zipunnikov
Volgograd State Medical University;
Volgograd Regional Center of Urology and Nephrology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Department of Urology, Nephrology and Transplantology, Faculty for Postgraduate Training of Healthcare Workers,
Volgograd
I. N. Dymkov
Volgograd State Medical University;
Volgograd Regional Center of Urology and Nephrology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Department of Urology, Nephrology and Transplantology, Faculty for Postgraduate Training of Healthcare Workers,
Volgograd
A. O. Shmanev
Volgograd State Medical University
Russian Federation
Volgograd
Russian Federation
Volgograd
References
1. Rassweiler J, Schulze M, Teber D, Seemann O, Frede T. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: functional and oncological outcomes. Curr Opin Urol. 2004;14(2):75-82. doi: 10.1097/00042307-200403000-00005
2. 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):292-7. doi: 10.1016/ s0090-4295(03)00352-2
3. Barré C. Open radical retropubic prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2007;52(1):71-80. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.11.057
4. Bormotin AV, Reva IA, Dyakov VV, Bernikov AN, Pushkar DY. Quality of life in patients over 70 years old after radical surgery for prostate cancer. Cancer Urology. 2014;10(1):58-63. (In Russ.) doi:10.17650/1726-9776-2014-10-1-58-63
5. Alekseev BY, Nyushko KM, Vorobyev NV, Kalpinskiy AS, Golovashchenko MP, Frank GA, Andreeva YY. Тhe rate and site of lymph node metastases during radical prostatectomy and extended lymphadenectomy in patients with prostate cancer. Cancer Urology. 2012;8(1):77-81. (In Russ.) doi:10.17650/1726-9776-2012-8-1-77-81
6. Stolzenburg JU, Do M, Pfeiffer H, König F, Aedtner B, Dorschner W.The endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE): technique and initial experience. World J Urol. 2002;20(1):48-55. doi: 10.1007/s00345-002-0265-4
7. Stolzenburg JU, Schwalenberg T, Horn LC, Neuhaus J, Constantinides C, Liatsikos EN. Anatomical landmarks of radical prostatecomy. Eur Urol. 2007;51(3):629-39. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.11.012
8. Walsh PC, Donker PJ. Impotence following radical prostatectomy: insight into etiology and prevention. J Urol. 1982;128(3):492-7. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)53012-8
9. Menon M, Tewari A, Peabody J; VIP Team. Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: technique. J Urol. 2003;169(6):2289-92. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000067464.53313.dd
10. Costello AJ, Brooks M, Cole OJ. Anatomical studies of the neurovascular bundle and cavernosal nerves. BJU Int. 2004;94(7):1071-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410x.2004.05106.x
11. Kiyoshima K, Yokomizo A, Yoshida T, Tomita K, Yonemasu H, Nakamura M, Oda Y, Naito S, Hasegawa Y. Anatomical features of periprostatic tissue and its surroundings: a histological analysis of 79 radical retropubic prostatectomy specimens. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2004;34(8):463-8. doi: 10.1093/jjco/hyh078
12. Stolzenburg JU, Kallidonis P, Do M, Dietel A, Häfner T, Rabenalt R, Sakellaropoulos G, Ganzer R, Paasch U, Horn LC, Liatsikos E.A comparison of outcomes for interfascial and intrafascial nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2010;76(3):743-8. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2010.03.089
13. van der Poel HG, de Blok W, Joshi N, van Muilekom E. Preservation of lateral prostatic fascia is associated with urine continence after robotic-assisted prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2009;55(4):892-900. doi: 10.1016/j. eururo.2009.01.021
14. Stolzenburg JU, Rabenalt R, Do M, Schwalenberg T, Winkler M, Dietel A, Liatsikos E. Intrafascial nerve-sparing endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy Eur Urol. 2008;53(5):931-40. doi: 10.1016/j. eururo.2007.11.047
15. Noldus J, Michl U, Graefen M, Haese A, Hammerer P, Huland H.Patient-reported sexual function after nervesparing radical retropubic prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2002;42(2):118-24. doi: 10.1016/s0302-2838(02)00219-1
16. Kundu SD, Roehl KA, Eggener SE, Antenor JA, Han M, Catalona WJ. Potency, continence and complications in 3,477 consecutive radical retropubic prostatectomies. J Urol. 2004;172(6 Pt 1):2227-31. doi: 10.1097/01. ju.0000145222.94455.73
17. Do M, Haefner T, Liatsikos E, Kallidonis P, Hicks J, Dietel A, Horn LC, Rabenalt R, Stolzenburg JU. Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy after previous transurethral resection of prostate: oncologic and functional outcomes of 100 cases. Urology. 2010;75(6):1348-52. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2009.09.009
18. Potdevin L, Ercolani M, Jeong J, Kim IY. Functional and oncologic outcomes comparing interfascial and intrafascial nerve sparing in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomies. J Endourol. 2009;23(9):1479-84. doi: 10.1089/end.2009.0369
19. Shikanov S, Woo J, Al-Ahmadie H, Katz MH, Zagaja GP, Shalhav AL, Zorn KC. Extrafascial versus interfascial nervesparing technique for robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: comparison of functional outcomes and positive surgical margins characteristics. Urology. 2009;74(3):611-6. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2009.01.092
Review
For citations:
Perlin D.V., Zipunnikov V.P., Dymkov I.N., Shmanev A.O. FUNCTIONAL RESULTS OF ENDOSCOPIC EXTRAPERITONEAL RADICAL INTRAFASCIAL PROSTATECTOMY. Urology Herald. 2018;6(1):18-26. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21886/2308-6424-2018-6-1-18-26
Views:
1492
Email this article 
