Cargando…

Robot-Assisted Perineal Radical Prostatectomy in a Post-Kidney Transplant Recipient

Background: After almost two decades, transabdominal robotic radical prostatectomy techniques have been fully developed and are widely practiced by many robotic urologists. Recently, a transperineal robotic radical prostatectomy, a technique not yet popular to many, was introduced as an alternative...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tugcu, Volkan, Simsek, Abdulmuttalip, Yigitbasi, Ismail, Yenice, Mustafa Gurkan, Sahin, Selcuk, Tasci, Ali Ihsan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5820682/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29468200
http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cren.2017.0119
Descripción
Sumario:Background: After almost two decades, transabdominal robotic radical prostatectomy techniques have been fully developed and are widely practiced by many robotic urologists. Recently, a transperineal robotic radical prostatectomy, a technique not yet popular to many, was introduced as an alternative approach in patients with previous abdominal surgery. Here, we present our unique experience with robotic perineal radical prostatectomy (r-PRP) on a kidney transplant recipient. Case Presentation: A 71-year-old man who had a kidney transplant 4 months previously was diagnosed with prostate cancer (PCa) and underwent r-PRP using the da Vinci Xi robotic system. The operative time was 110 minutes and blood loss was minimal. After the perineal drain was removed on postoperative day 3, the patient was discharged. The urethral catheter was subsequently removed on postoperative day 8. Pathologic analysis revealed localized PCa with negative surgical margins. Conclusion: The r-PRP offers all the advantages of minimally invasive surgery. Moreover, in a kidney transplant recipient, it provides additional benefits, such as avoidance of allograft vascular and ureteral injuries, while maintaining an equivalent oncologic efficacy and surgical safety compared with its transabdominal counterpart.