Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy After Transurethral Resection of the Prostate: Surgical and Functional Outcomes

Department of Urology, Henri Mondor Hospital, Créteil, France.
Urology (Impact Factor: 2.19). 10/2008; 72(3):593-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2008.03.019
Source: PubMed


To compare the morbidity and functional results after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with and without previous transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).
From May 1998 to January 2005, 640 patients underwent laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, of whom 46 (7.2%) had previously undergone TURP. The perioperative and postoperative data were compared between group 1 (with previous TURP) and group 2 (without previous TURP). The functional results were assessed by self-administered questionnaires at 12 and 24 months after surgery.
In group 1, the operative time, hospital stay, and bladder catheterization duration was increased by 31 minutes, 1.9 days, and 2.9 days, respectively. The positive margin rate was not significantly different statistically between the two groups (P = .62). The 5-year actuarial freedom from biochemical recurrence rate was similar between the two groups (P = .86). Surgical complications occurred in 15.2% of group 1 and 5.7% of group 2 (P = .02). The risk of anastomotic stricture was 6.5% and 1.2% in groups 1 and 2, respectively (P = .02). Two years after surgery, the continence rate was 86.9% in group 1 and 95.8% in group 2 (P = .77), and the potency rate was 63.8% and 70.9%, respectively, after bilateral neurovascular bundle preservation (P = .61). However, neurovascular bundle preservation was performed after previous TURP in only 56.5% of group 1 vs 78.9% in group 2 (P = .02). The median follow-up was 50.8 months (range 30-107).
Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy can be performed after TURP without compromising the oncologic results. However, patients should be informed that the procedure is associated with worse intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. Although the urinary continence rate was not hampered by previous TURP, neurovascular bundle preservation is technically more difficult and compromises postoperative erectile function.

32 Reads
  • Source
    • "Do et al. [6] and Menard et al. [8] performed LRP at least 3 months after the TURP procedure since, by that time, the periprostatic inflammation caused by the TURP had probably subsided and conditions in the operative field would have been more favourable. Elder et al. [23] recommended that radical perineal prostatectomy should be performed during the first month after TURP or after a time interval of 4 months. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess surgical, oncologic and functional results after robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) with and without previous transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). Methods: Between December 2005 and January 2010, 200 patients underwent RALP, of whom 16 (8%) had received previous TURP and 184 (92%) had not. Perioperative and postoperative data were compared between those with previous TURP (group 1) and those without previous TURP (group 2). All patients included in the study had at least 1-year follow-up. Results: Preoperative clinical parameters were comparable between both groups. Group 1 patients were found to have significantly more need for bladder neck reconstruction (93.75 % vs. 15.21%, P <0.001), more rectal injury (18.75% vs. 0%, P <0.001), higher incidence of major complications (18.8% vs. 1.1%, P<0.001), and smaller specimen volume (31.63 mL vs. 45.49 mL, P<0.001) than group 2. The 12-month continence rate was 93.8 % in group 1 and 97.8% in group 2 (P =0.344). A nerve-sparing technique was significantly less successfully performed in group 1 patients than in group 2 (33.3% vs. 92.0 %, P=0.001). Conclusions: Performing RALP for prostate cancer in patients who have had previous TURP is a technically demanding procedure and may be potentially associated with a higher perioperative major complication rate in short-term follow-up. Neurovascular bundle preservation is technically more challenging.
    06/2014; 2(2):82-9. DOI:10.12954/PI.14046
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy has become a frequently used alternative treatment option in the management of prostate cancer. As more operations are performed, more challenging patient conditions are encountered, for example those with previous abdominal cancer surgery. We present our experience of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) in patients with previous cancer surgery. Seven patients with a history of previous surgery for malignancy underwent RALP. All the prostatectomies were performed using the da Vinci™ S surgical system by a single surgeon. All operations were approached transperitoneally. We reviewed perioperative data and surgical outcomes retrospectively. The mean age at surgery was 68.43years (range 63–82). The mean operative time was 214±47.32min, and the median estimated blood loss was 500ml (range 200–1,300). The mean hospital stay was 6.57±2.15days, and the mean duration of catheterization was 8.29±3.09days. Nerve-sparing procedure and pelvic lymph node dissection were performed in six patients. Rectal injury occurred in one patient who had undergone hemi-colectomy 15years previously and was resolved by primary closure. Positive surgical margin was found in three patients. Although one patient had an intraoperative rectal injury, RALP in a patient with previous cancer surgery seems to be feasible and safe in experienced hands.
    Journal of Robotic Surgery 01/2010; 3(4):223-227. DOI:10.1007/s11701-009-0169-z
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Previous abdominal or prostate surgery can be a significant barrier to subsequent minimally invasive procedures, including radical prostatectomy (RP). This is relevant to a quarter of prostatectomy patients who have had previous surgery. The technological advances of robot-assisted laparoscopic RP (RALP) can mitigate some of these challenges. To that end, our objective was to elucidate the effect of previous surgery on RALP, and to describe a multidisciplinary approach to the previously entered abdomen. One-thousand four-hundred and fourteen RALP patients were identified from a single-surgeon database. Potentially difficult cases were discussed preoperatively and treated in a multidisciplinary fashion with a general surgeon. Operative, pathological, and functional outcomes were analyzed after stratification by previous surgical history. Four-hundred and twenty (30 %) patients underwent previous surgery at least once. Perioperative outcomes were similar among most groups. Previous major abdominal surgery was associated with increased operative time (147 vs. 119 min, p < 0.001), as was the presence of adhesions (120 vs. 154 min, p < 0.001). Incidence of complications was comparable, irrespective of surgical history. Major complications included two enterotomies diagnosed intraoperatively and one patient requiring reoperation. All cases were performed robotically, without conversion to open-RP. There was no difference in biochemical disease-free survival among surgical groups and continence and potency were equivalent between groups. In conclusion, previous abdominal surgery did not affect the safety or feasibility of RALP, with all patients experiencing comparable perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes.
    Journal of Robotic Surgery 06/2012; 7(2). DOI:10.1007/s11701-012-0358-z
Show more