Background: While 5-port laparoendoscopic radical prostatectomy is standard practice, efforts have been focused in developing a single port surgery for cosmetic reasons. However, this is still in the pioneering stage considering the challenging nature of the surgical procedures. We have therefore focused on reduced port surgery, using only 2-ports. In this study, we compared 2-port laparoendoscopic radical prostatectomy (2-port RP) and conventional 5-port laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) for clinically localized prostate carcinoma and evaluated the potential advantages of each.
Materials and Methods: From January 2010 to December 2010, all 23 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer underwent LRP. Starting November, 2010, when we introduced the reduced port approach, we performed this procedure for 22 consecutive patients diagnosed with early-stage prostate cancer (cT1c, cT2N0). The patients were matched 1:1 to 2-port RP or LRP for age, preoperative serum PSA level, clinical stage, biopsy and pathological Gleason grade, surgical margin status, pad-free rates and post-operative pain.
Results: There was a significant difference in operative time between the 2-port RP and LRP groups (286.5±63.3 and 351.8±72.4 min: p=0.0019, without any variation in blood loss (including urine) (945.1±479.6 vs 1271.1±871.8ml: p=0.13). The Foley catheter indwelling period was shorter in the 2 port RP group, but without significance (5.6±1.8 vs 8.0±5.6 days: p=0.057) and the total perioperative complication rates for 2 port RP and LRP were comparable at 4.5% and 8.7% (p=0.58). There was an improvement in pad-free rates up to 6 months follow-up (p=0.090), and significantly improvement at 1 year (p=0.040). PSA recurrence was 1 (4.5%) in 2-port RP and 2 (8.7%) in LRP. Continuous epidural anesthesia was used in most of LRP patients (95.7%) and in early 2-port RP patients (40.9%). In these patients, average total amount of Diclofenac sodium was 27.8mg/patient in 2-port RP and 50.0mg/patient in LRP.
Conclusions: Thus the reduced port approach is as efficacious as LRP in terms of many outcome measures, with significant cosmetic advantages and reduction in post surgical pain. This method can be readily performed safely and therefore can be recommended as a standard laparoscopic surgery for prostate cancer in the future.
Written by:
Akita H, Nakane A, Ando R, Yamada K, Kobayashi T, Okamura T, Kohri K Are you the author?
Department of Urology, JA Aichi Anjo Kosei Hospital, Anjo, Japan E-mail :
Reference: Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2013;14(11):6311-4
PubMed Abstract
PMID: 24377523
UroToday.com Prostate Cancer Section
