A matched-pair comparison of single plus one port versus standard extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by a single urologist

We conducted this study to report on our initial experience and assess the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of extraperitoneal single plus one port laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (SPOPL-RP), and determine whether it shows any objective advantage over standard laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

From June 2009 to September 2011, 15 extraperitoneal SPOPL-RPs were performed through a 2-3-cm subumbilical longitudinal incision and another 5-mm trocar placed at the McBurney point This cohort was compared with 37 contemporary patients who underwent standard extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy performed by the same urologist Peri- and postoperative outcomes, including continence, potency, and scar length, were statistically analyzed The two groups were comparable with respect to patient demographics, estimated blood loss, drainage time, duration of catheterization, catheterization rate >14 days, complication rate, postoperative hospitalization, and postoperative functional and oncologic outcomes (p > 0 05) The SPOPL-RP procedures had a longer mean operative time (170 1 minutes vs 139 5 minutes, p = 0 005), but with fewer patients requiring analgesics (20% vs 54 1%, p = 0 038) and earlier resumption of oral intake (20 7 hours vs 26 8 hours, p = 0 037) The mean scar length in the SPOPL-RP group was much smaller (3 4 cm vs 5 8 cm, p = 0 000) owing to the significant reduction of the skin incision The peri- and postoperative outcomes of SPOPL-RP for low-risk prostate cancer are comparable to those with the standard laparoscopic approach In addition, SPOPL-RP provides better postoperative pain control, faster recovery of bowel function, and smaller scar length than standard laparoscopy, albeit with a longer operative time

The Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences 2015 May 13 [Epub]

Dong-Xu Zhang, Jing-Fei Teng, Xiu-Wu Pan, Kai Wang, Xin-Gang Cui, Dan-Feng Xu, Yao Li, Yi Gao, Lei Yin, Jun-Kai Wang, Lu Chen

Department of Urologic Surgery, First Hospital of Ningbo City, Affiliated Medical School of Ningbo University, Ningbo, China , Department of Urologic Surgery, General Hospital of Beijing Military Command, Beijing, China , Department of Urologic Surgery, Changzheng Hospital of the Second Military Medical University Shanghai, Shanghai, China , Department of Urologic Surgery, Zhejiang Xiaoshan Hospital, Hangzhou, China , Department of Urologic Surgery, Changzheng Hospital of the Second Military Medical University Shanghai, Shanghai, China Electronic address: cuixingang_smmu@126 com , Department of Urologic Surgery, Changzheng Hospital of the Second Military Medical University Shanghai, Shanghai, China , Department of Urologic Surgery, Changzheng Hospital of the Second Military Medical University Shanghai, Shanghai, China , Department of Urologic Surgery, Changzheng Hospital of the Second Military Medical University Shanghai, Shanghai, China , Department of Urologic Surgery, Changzheng Hospital of the Second Military Medical University Shanghai, Shanghai, China , Department of Urologic Surgery, Changzheng Hospital of the Second Military Medical University Shanghai, Shanghai, China , Department of Urologic Surgery, Changzheng Hospital of the Second Military Medical University Shanghai, Shanghai, China

PubMed     

E-Newsletters

Newsletter subscription

Free Daily and Weekly newsletters offered by content of interest

The fields of GU Oncology and Urology are rapidly advancing. Sign up today for articles, videos, conference highlights and abstracts from peer-review publications by disease and condition delivered to your inbox and read on the go.

Subscribe