Cargando…

Implications of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair on open, laparoscopic, and robotic radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE: There have been anecdotal reports of surgeons having to abandon radical prostatectomy (RP) after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR) due to obliteration of tissue planes by mesh. Nodal dissection may also be compromised. We prospectively collected data from four experienced prostate...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Spernat, Dan, Sofield, David, Moon, Daniel, Louie-Johnsun, Mark, Woo, Henry H
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Asian Pacific Prostate Society (APPS) 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3970989/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24693528
http://dx.doi.org/10.12954/PI.13032
_version_ 1782309445616795648
author Spernat, Dan
Sofield, David
Moon, Daniel
Louie-Johnsun, Mark
Woo, Henry H
author_facet Spernat, Dan
Sofield, David
Moon, Daniel
Louie-Johnsun, Mark
Woo, Henry H
author_sort Spernat, Dan
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: There have been anecdotal reports of surgeons having to abandon radical prostatectomy (RP) after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR) due to obliteration of tissue planes by mesh. Nodal dissection may also be compromised. We prospectively collected data from four experienced prostate surgeons from separate institutions. Our objective was to evaluate the success rate of performing open RP (ORP), laparoscopic RP (LRP) and robotic assisted RP (RALRP) and pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) after LIHR, and the frequency of complications. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained databases of men who underwent RP after LIHR between 2004 and 2010 at four institutions was undertaken. The data recorded included age, preoperative prostate-specific antigen, preoperative Gleason score, and clinical stage. The operative approach, success or failure to perform RP, success or failure to perform PLND, pathological stage, and complications were also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 1,181 men underwent RP between 2004 and 2010. Fifty-seven patients (4.8%) underwent RP after LIHR. An ORP was attempted in 19 patients, LRP in 33, and RALRP in 5. All 57 cases were able to be successfully completed. Ten of the 18 open PLND were able to be completed (55.6%). Four of the 22 laparoscopic LND were able to be completed (18.2%). Robotic LND was possible in 5 of 5 cases (100%). Therefore, it was not possible to complete a LND 56.8% of patients. Complications were limited to ten patients. These complications included one LRP converted to ORP due to failure to progress, and one rectourethral fistula in a salvage procedure post failed high intensity focused ultrasound. CONCLUSIONS: LIHR is an increasingly common method of treating inguinal hernias. LIHR is not a contra-indication to RP. However PLND may not be possible in over 50% of patients who have had LIHR. Therefore, these patients may be under-staged and under treated.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3970989
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Asian Pacific Prostate Society (APPS)
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39709892014-04-01 Implications of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair on open, laparoscopic, and robotic radical prostatectomy Spernat, Dan Sofield, David Moon, Daniel Louie-Johnsun, Mark Woo, Henry H Prostate Int Original Articles PURPOSE: There have been anecdotal reports of surgeons having to abandon radical prostatectomy (RP) after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR) due to obliteration of tissue planes by mesh. Nodal dissection may also be compromised. We prospectively collected data from four experienced prostate surgeons from separate institutions. Our objective was to evaluate the success rate of performing open RP (ORP), laparoscopic RP (LRP) and robotic assisted RP (RALRP) and pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) after LIHR, and the frequency of complications. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained databases of men who underwent RP after LIHR between 2004 and 2010 at four institutions was undertaken. The data recorded included age, preoperative prostate-specific antigen, preoperative Gleason score, and clinical stage. The operative approach, success or failure to perform RP, success or failure to perform PLND, pathological stage, and complications were also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 1,181 men underwent RP between 2004 and 2010. Fifty-seven patients (4.8%) underwent RP after LIHR. An ORP was attempted in 19 patients, LRP in 33, and RALRP in 5. All 57 cases were able to be successfully completed. Ten of the 18 open PLND were able to be completed (55.6%). Four of the 22 laparoscopic LND were able to be completed (18.2%). Robotic LND was possible in 5 of 5 cases (100%). Therefore, it was not possible to complete a LND 56.8% of patients. Complications were limited to ten patients. These complications included one LRP converted to ORP due to failure to progress, and one rectourethral fistula in a salvage procedure post failed high intensity focused ultrasound. CONCLUSIONS: LIHR is an increasingly common method of treating inguinal hernias. LIHR is not a contra-indication to RP. However PLND may not be possible in over 50% of patients who have had LIHR. Therefore, these patients may be under-staged and under treated. Asian Pacific Prostate Society (APPS) 2014-03 2013-12-30 /pmc/articles/PMC3970989/ /pubmed/24693528 http://dx.doi.org/10.12954/PI.13032 Text en Copyright © 2014 Asian Pacific Prostate Society (APPS) This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Spernat, Dan
Sofield, David
Moon, Daniel
Louie-Johnsun, Mark
Woo, Henry H
Implications of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair on open, laparoscopic, and robotic radical prostatectomy
title Implications of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair on open, laparoscopic, and robotic radical prostatectomy
title_full Implications of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair on open, laparoscopic, and robotic radical prostatectomy
title_fullStr Implications of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair on open, laparoscopic, and robotic radical prostatectomy
title_full_unstemmed Implications of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair on open, laparoscopic, and robotic radical prostatectomy
title_short Implications of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair on open, laparoscopic, and robotic radical prostatectomy
title_sort implications of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair on open, laparoscopic, and robotic radical prostatectomy
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3970989/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24693528
http://dx.doi.org/10.12954/PI.13032
work_keys_str_mv AT spernatdan implicationsoflaparoscopicinguinalherniarepaironopenlaparoscopicandroboticradicalprostatectomy
AT sofielddavid implicationsoflaparoscopicinguinalherniarepaironopenlaparoscopicandroboticradicalprostatectomy
AT moondaniel implicationsoflaparoscopicinguinalherniarepaironopenlaparoscopicandroboticradicalprostatectomy
AT louiejohnsunmark implicationsoflaparoscopicinguinalherniarepaironopenlaparoscopicandroboticradicalprostatectomy
AT woohenryh implicationsoflaparoscopicinguinalherniarepaironopenlaparoscopicandroboticradicalprostatectomy