Abstract：Objective:To compare the perioperative clinical data, complications, postoperative function recovery after Leonardo's robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) vs. retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) for local prostate cancer, and primarily evaluate the applied value of RALRP. Methods: The clinical data of 38 cases of prostate cancer undergoing RALRP performed by the same group of surgeons from Jan. 2013 to Nov. 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. The operating time, blood loss, blood transfusion, postoperative hospital stay and postoperative follow-up urinary continence were observed in RALRP group, and compared with those in 20 cases of RRP at the same period. Results:In RALRP and RRP group, the average operative time was 4-6 h and 3-15 h, and the average blood loss was 50-150 mL and 850-1 500 mL (P<0.05). The blood transfusion rate in RALRP and RRP groups was 0 and 85% respectively (P<0.05). The continence rate one month after operation in RALRP group and RRP group was 81.6% and 55% respectively (P<0.05). The average postoperative hostal stay in RALRP group and RRP group was 5.3 days and 10.6 days respectively (P<0.05). Conclusions:The primary results suggest that RALRP shows the advantages of reducing blood loss and blood transfusion, and advancing the controlled micturition over RRP.
[1]Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, et al. Global Cancer Statistics. CA Cancer J Clin, 2011,61(2):69-90. [2]Reiner WG, Walsh PC. An anatomical approach to the surgical management of the dorsal vein and Santorini's plexus during radical retropubic surgery. J Urol, 2009,121(2):198-200. [3]Walsh PC, Donker PJ. Impotence following radical prostatectomy: insight into etiology and prevention. J Urol, 1982,128(3):492-497. [4]Walsh PC, Schlegel PN. Radical pelvic surgery with preservation of sexual function. Ann Surg, 1988, 208(4): 391-400. [5]Lepor H, Walsh PC. Long-term results of radical prostatectomy in clinically localized prostate cancer: experience at the Johns Hopkins Hospital. NCI Monogr, 1988,(7):117-122. [6]Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A, et al. Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes. J Urol, 2002,168(3):945-949. [7]Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Palmer KJ, et al. Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a review of current outcomes. BJU Int, 2009,104(10):1428-1435. [8]Berryhill R Jr, Jhaveri J, Yadav R, et al. Robotic prostatectomy: a review of outcomes compared with laparoscopic and open approaches. Urology, 2008,72(1):15-23. [9]Menon M, Bhandari M, Gupta N, et al. Biochemical recurrence following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: analysis of 1384 patients with a median 5-year follow-up. Eur Urol, 2010, 58(6):838-846. [10]Novara G, Ficarra V, Rosen RC, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2012, 62(3):431-452.
