Robotic radical prostatectomy for patients with locally advanced prostate cancer is feasible: Results of a single-institution study

Won Sik Ham, Sung Yul Park, Koon Ho Rha, Won Tae Kim, Young Deuk Choi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

41 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic prostatectomy (RP) in patients with clinically localized or locally advanced prostate cancer (PC). Patients and Methods: Between July 2005 and February 2008, we performed RP in 357 patients by using the da Vinci® robot system and a transperitoneal approach. We defined locally advanced PC as cases with a clinical T-stage ≥T3a with any serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or Gleason score. Among the 321 men not treated with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy, 200 patients had clinically localized PC and 121 patients had locally advanced PC. We compared perioperative variables and early surgical outcomes between the two groups. Results: Although advanced PC patients had significantly higher mean preoperative PSA levels, prostatectomy Gleason scores, and extracapsular extension rates, there were no significant differences in mean operation time, estimated blood loss, duration of bladder catheterization, hospital stay, or initiation of a regular postoperative diet between the two groups. Except for some early cases, a bilateral extended lymphadenectomy was performed without difficulty in both groups. Although both the frequency of lymph node invasion and the positive surgical margin rates were higher in the advanced PC patients, the positive surgical margin rate (48.8) in the present study was similar to those of open radical retropubic prostatectomy in other studies. The overall complication rate did not differ between the two groups. Two intraoperative rectal injuries occurred in patients with locally advanced PC and were closed primarily without specific problems, except for 1 case. Conclusions: Our results suggest that RP may be performed safely on patients with locally advanced PC.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)329-332
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques
Volume19
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2009 Jun 1

Fingerprint

Robotics
Prostatectomy
Prostatic Neoplasms
Neoplasm Grading
Prostate-Specific Antigen
Neoadjuvant Therapy
Lymph Node Excision
Catheterization
Length of Stay
Urinary Bladder
Lymph Nodes
Diet
Wounds and Injuries
Serum

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery

Cite this

@article{5f684bade3284be5b711aa71df15dfc2,
title = "Robotic radical prostatectomy for patients with locally advanced prostate cancer is feasible: Results of a single-institution study",
abstract = "Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic prostatectomy (RP) in patients with clinically localized or locally advanced prostate cancer (PC). Patients and Methods: Between July 2005 and February 2008, we performed RP in 357 patients by using the da Vinci{\circledR} robot system and a transperitoneal approach. We defined locally advanced PC as cases with a clinical T-stage ≥T3a with any serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or Gleason score. Among the 321 men not treated with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy, 200 patients had clinically localized PC and 121 patients had locally advanced PC. We compared perioperative variables and early surgical outcomes between the two groups. Results: Although advanced PC patients had significantly higher mean preoperative PSA levels, prostatectomy Gleason scores, and extracapsular extension rates, there were no significant differences in mean operation time, estimated blood loss, duration of bladder catheterization, hospital stay, or initiation of a regular postoperative diet between the two groups. Except for some early cases, a bilateral extended lymphadenectomy was performed without difficulty in both groups. Although both the frequency of lymph node invasion and the positive surgical margin rates were higher in the advanced PC patients, the positive surgical margin rate (48.8) in the present study was similar to those of open radical retropubic prostatectomy in other studies. The overall complication rate did not differ between the two groups. Two intraoperative rectal injuries occurred in patients with locally advanced PC and were closed primarily without specific problems, except for 1 case. Conclusions: Our results suggest that RP may be performed safely on patients with locally advanced PC.",
author = "Ham, {Won Sik} and Park, {Sung Yul} and Rha, {Koon Ho} and Kim, {Won Tae} and Choi, {Young Deuk}",
year = "2009",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1089/lap.2008.0344",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "329--332",
journal = "Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques - Part A",
issn = "1092-6429",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Robotic radical prostatectomy for patients with locally advanced prostate cancer is feasible

T2 - Results of a single-institution study

AU - Ham, Won Sik

AU - Park, Sung Yul

AU - Rha, Koon Ho

AU - Kim, Won Tae

AU - Choi, Young Deuk

PY - 2009/6/1

Y1 - 2009/6/1

N2 - Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic prostatectomy (RP) in patients with clinically localized or locally advanced prostate cancer (PC). Patients and Methods: Between July 2005 and February 2008, we performed RP in 357 patients by using the da Vinci® robot system and a transperitoneal approach. We defined locally advanced PC as cases with a clinical T-stage ≥T3a with any serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or Gleason score. Among the 321 men not treated with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy, 200 patients had clinically localized PC and 121 patients had locally advanced PC. We compared perioperative variables and early surgical outcomes between the two groups. Results: Although advanced PC patients had significantly higher mean preoperative PSA levels, prostatectomy Gleason scores, and extracapsular extension rates, there were no significant differences in mean operation time, estimated blood loss, duration of bladder catheterization, hospital stay, or initiation of a regular postoperative diet between the two groups. Except for some early cases, a bilateral extended lymphadenectomy was performed without difficulty in both groups. Although both the frequency of lymph node invasion and the positive surgical margin rates were higher in the advanced PC patients, the positive surgical margin rate (48.8) in the present study was similar to those of open radical retropubic prostatectomy in other studies. The overall complication rate did not differ between the two groups. Two intraoperative rectal injuries occurred in patients with locally advanced PC and were closed primarily without specific problems, except for 1 case. Conclusions: Our results suggest that RP may be performed safely on patients with locally advanced PC.

AB - Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic prostatectomy (RP) in patients with clinically localized or locally advanced prostate cancer (PC). Patients and Methods: Between July 2005 and February 2008, we performed RP in 357 patients by using the da Vinci® robot system and a transperitoneal approach. We defined locally advanced PC as cases with a clinical T-stage ≥T3a with any serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or Gleason score. Among the 321 men not treated with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy, 200 patients had clinically localized PC and 121 patients had locally advanced PC. We compared perioperative variables and early surgical outcomes between the two groups. Results: Although advanced PC patients had significantly higher mean preoperative PSA levels, prostatectomy Gleason scores, and extracapsular extension rates, there were no significant differences in mean operation time, estimated blood loss, duration of bladder catheterization, hospital stay, or initiation of a regular postoperative diet between the two groups. Except for some early cases, a bilateral extended lymphadenectomy was performed without difficulty in both groups. Although both the frequency of lymph node invasion and the positive surgical margin rates were higher in the advanced PC patients, the positive surgical margin rate (48.8) in the present study was similar to those of open radical retropubic prostatectomy in other studies. The overall complication rate did not differ between the two groups. Two intraoperative rectal injuries occurred in patients with locally advanced PC and were closed primarily without specific problems, except for 1 case. Conclusions: Our results suggest that RP may be performed safely on patients with locally advanced PC.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70349195199&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70349195199&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/lap.2008.0344

DO - 10.1089/lap.2008.0344

M3 - Article

C2 - 19397390

AN - SCOPUS:70349195199

VL - 19

SP - 329

EP - 332

JO - Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques - Part A

JF - Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques - Part A

SN - 1092-6429

IS - 3

ER -