Cargando…
Technical Tips in Managing Large Median Lobes During Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy
Prostate cancer surgeons are commonly faced by a technically challenging situation dealing with prostate cancer having large median lobes. Patients with large median lobes often have larger prostates, which makes it difficult to visualize anatomical planes during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9516463/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36186608 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2022.08.017 |
Sumario: | Prostate cancer surgeons are commonly faced by a technically challenging situation dealing with prostate cancer having large median lobes. Patients with large median lobes often have larger prostates, which makes it difficult to visualize anatomical planes during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Herein, we described our experience in dealing with large median lobes during RARP. We have focused on technical tips to avoid complications and facilitate a smooth procedure in patients with large median lobes during RARP. A total of 2671 patients who underwent RARP were divided into two groups based on the presence or absence of a protruded median lobe (PML): group A (2411 patients without a PML) and group B (260 patients with a PML). All patients underwent preoperative magnetic resonance imaging and final intraoperative confirmation for the presence of a PML. Pre-, intra-, and postoperative parameters were compared in two groups using the Student t test and two-proportion t test as appropriate. Patients in group B have statistically significantly higher median prostate-specific antigen (PSA; 7.7 vs 5.8 ng/dl), PSA density (0.17 vs 0.09), and International Prostate Symptom Score (19.5 vs 7.2); longer median console time (114 vs 134 min) and surgery time (145 vs 170 min); and higher blood loss (150 vs 175 ml) than those in group A. There were no statistically significant differences in pathological stages (T2, T3; 87%, 13% vs 88%, 12%) and rates of positive surgical margins (7% vs 8.5%) between groups A and B. Single-center and retrospective design was the major limitation of our study. We conclude that understanding the key steps to facilitate bladder neck dissection is vital to avoid serious intraoperative events and to maximize outcomes. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at our robotic radical prostatectomy cohort with large median lobes. We found that surgery in these patients requires more time and blood loss, but similar cancer control. We conclude that following the key steps are important to avoid complications. |
---|