Cargando…

Contemporary Radical Prostatectomy

Purpose. Patients diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer have more surgical treatment options than in the past. This paper focuses on the procedures' oncological or functional outcomes and perioperative morbidities of radical retropubic prostatectomy, radical perineal prostatectomy...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fu, Qiang, Moul, Judd W., Sun, Leon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3200259/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22110994
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/645030
_version_ 1782214673865637888
author Fu, Qiang
Moul, Judd W.
Sun, Leon
author_facet Fu, Qiang
Moul, Judd W.
Sun, Leon
author_sort Fu, Qiang
collection PubMed
description Purpose. Patients diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer have more surgical treatment options than in the past. This paper focuses on the procedures' oncological or functional outcomes and perioperative morbidities of radical retropubic prostatectomy, radical perineal prostatectomy, and robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Materials and Methods. A MEDLINE/PubMed search of the literature on radical prostatectomy and other new management options was performed. Results. Compared to the open procedures, robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy has no confirmed significant difference in most literatures besides less blood loss and blood transfusion. Nerve sparing is a safe means of preserving potency on well-selected patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. Positive surgical margin rates of radical prostatectomy affect the recurrence and survival of prostate cancer. The urinary and sexual function outcomes have been vastly improved. Neoadjuvant treatment only affects the rate of positive surgical margin. Adjuvant therapy can delay and reduce the risk of recurrence and improve the survival of the high risk prostate cancer. Conclusions. For the majority of patients with organ-confined prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy remains a most effective approach. Radical perineal prostatectomy remains a viable approach for patients with morbid obesity, prior pelvic surgery, or prior pelvic radiation. Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) has become popular among surgeons but has not yet become the firmly established standard of care. Long-term data have confirmed the efficacy of radical retropubic prostatectomy with disease control rates and cancer-specific survival rates.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3200259
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32002592011-11-22 Contemporary Radical Prostatectomy Fu, Qiang Moul, Judd W. Sun, Leon Prostate Cancer Review Article Purpose. Patients diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer have more surgical treatment options than in the past. This paper focuses on the procedures' oncological or functional outcomes and perioperative morbidities of radical retropubic prostatectomy, radical perineal prostatectomy, and robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Materials and Methods. A MEDLINE/PubMed search of the literature on radical prostatectomy and other new management options was performed. Results. Compared to the open procedures, robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy has no confirmed significant difference in most literatures besides less blood loss and blood transfusion. Nerve sparing is a safe means of preserving potency on well-selected patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. Positive surgical margin rates of radical prostatectomy affect the recurrence and survival of prostate cancer. The urinary and sexual function outcomes have been vastly improved. Neoadjuvant treatment only affects the rate of positive surgical margin. Adjuvant therapy can delay and reduce the risk of recurrence and improve the survival of the high risk prostate cancer. Conclusions. For the majority of patients with organ-confined prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy remains a most effective approach. Radical perineal prostatectomy remains a viable approach for patients with morbid obesity, prior pelvic surgery, or prior pelvic radiation. Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) has become popular among surgeons but has not yet become the firmly established standard of care. Long-term data have confirmed the efficacy of radical retropubic prostatectomy with disease control rates and cancer-specific survival rates. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2011 2011-04-14 /pmc/articles/PMC3200259/ /pubmed/22110994 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/645030 Text en Copyright © 2011 Qiang Fu et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Article
Fu, Qiang
Moul, Judd W.
Sun, Leon
Contemporary Radical Prostatectomy
title Contemporary Radical Prostatectomy
title_full Contemporary Radical Prostatectomy
title_fullStr Contemporary Radical Prostatectomy
title_full_unstemmed Contemporary Radical Prostatectomy
title_short Contemporary Radical Prostatectomy
title_sort contemporary radical prostatectomy
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3200259/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22110994
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/645030
work_keys_str_mv AT fuqiang contemporaryradicalprostatectomy
AT mouljuddw contemporaryradicalprostatectomy
AT sunleon contemporaryradicalprostatectomy