medigraphic.com
Organo Oficial de la Sociedad Mexicana de Urología

2021, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Urol 2021; 81 (4)

Open and laparoscopic prostatectomy: comparison of oncological and functional outcomes

Gutiérrez-Córdova J, Abad-Licham M, Astigueta-Pérez J

Language: Spanish
References: 26
Page:
PDF size: 181.88 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare oncological and functional results of open and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer.
Materials And Methods: A retrospective cohort analytical study was carried out, where a total of 70 patients with a clinical diagnosis of localized prostate cancer were evaluated, during the period June 2010 to June 2015. The patients were grouped according to the technique used: open surgery (n = 40) and laparoscopic surgery (n = 30). Preoperative variables were analyzed (age, prostate-specific antigen, biopsy histology, functional status and comorbidities), perioperative (surgical time, intraoperative bleeding, hospital stay and complications), postoperative: oncological (stage, histological findings of the surgical specimen and TNM) and postoperative functional (urinary continence and potency or sexual performance).
Results: No significant differences were found in oncological results; but if in intraoperative bleeding (1177 vs 440 cc; p ‹0.001), hospital stay (5.8 vs 4.6 days; p = 0.003), complications (35 vs 10%; p = 0.016) and continence (65 vs 93%; p = 0.018), in favor of the laparoscopic technique. When evaluating the surgical time, it was found that it was shorter with the open technique (242 vs 295 minutes; p <0.001).
Conclusions: At 60 months of follow-up, there was no significant difference in oncological results or sexual potency between the two groups. With the laparoscopic technique, less intraoperative bleeding, fewer intraoperative and postoperative complications, shorter hospital stay and better recovery from urinary continence were found.


REFERENCES

  1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394– 424. doi: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492

  2. Wong MCS, Goggins WB, Wang HHX, Fung FDH, Leung C, Wong SYS, et al. Global Incidence and Mortality for Prostate Cancer: Analysis of Temporal Patterns and Trends in 36 Countries. Eur Urol. 2016;70(5):862–74. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.05.043

  3. Vallejos-Sologuren CS. Situación del Cáncer en el Perú. Diagnóstico. 2020;59(2):77–85. doi: https://doi.org/10.33734/diagnostico.v59i2.221

  4. Gustavsen G, Taylor K, Cole D, Gullet L, Lewine N. Health economic impact of a biopsy-based cell cycle gene expression assay in localized prostate cancer. Future Oncology. 2020;16(36):3061–74. doi: https://doi.org/10.2217/fon-2020-0648

  5. Nkengurutse G, Tian F, Jiang S, Wang Q, Wang Y, Sun W. Preoperative Predictors of Biochemical Recurrence-Free Survival in High-Risk Prostate Cancer Following Radical Prostatectomy. Front Oncol. 2020; 10:1761. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.01761

  6. Pérez JCAA. El cáncer de próstata y su tamizaje en el Perú. Revista Peruana de Investigación en Salud. 2019;3(4):147–9. doi: https://doi. org/10.35839/repis.3.4.503

  7. Ministerio de Salud. Programa presupuestal 0024.Prevención y control del cáncer. Perú: Ministerio de Salud; 2019 p. 397.

  8. American Urological Association. Prostate Cancer Guidelines. Estados Unidos; 2021.

  9. Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA, Mason M, Metcalfe C, Holding P, et al. Active monitoring, radical prostatectomy and radical radiotherapy in PSA-detected clinically localised prostate cancer: the ProtecT three-arm RCT. Health Technology Assessment. 2020;24(37):1–176. doi: https://doi.org/10.3310/hta24370

  10. Benelli A, Varca V, Simonato A, Terrone C, Gregori A. Pentafecta Rates of Three- Dimensional Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: Our Experience after 150 Cases. Urologia. 2017;84(2):93–7. doi: https://doi. org/10.5301/uj.5000239 Article information

  11. Ilic D, Evans SM, Allan CA, Jung JH, Murphy D, Frydenberg M. Laparoscopic and roboticassisted versus open radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localised prostate cancer. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2017;(9). doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009625. pub2

  12. Coughlin GD, Yaxley JW, Chambers SK, Occhipinti S, Samaratunga H, Zajdlewicz L, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus open radical retropubic prostatectomy: 24-month outcomes from a randomised controlled study. The Lancet Oncology. 2018 Aug 1;19(8):1051–60. doi: https://doi. org/10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30357-7

  13. Gozen AS, Akin Y, Ates M, Fiedler M, Rassweiler J. The impact of bladder neck sparing on urinary continence during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy; Results from a high volume centre. Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia. 2017;89(3):186–91. doi: https:// doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2017.3.186

  14. Salazar A, Regis L, Planas J, Celma A, Díaz F, Gallardo I, et al. Variaciones de la prostatectomía radical para una recuperación de la continencia urinaria precoz: una revisión sistemática. Actas Urológicas Españolas. 2019;43(10):526–35. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acuro.2019.06.003

  15. Faris AER, Montague DK, Gill BC. Perioperative Educational Interventions and Contemporary Sexual Function Outcomes of Radical Prostatectomy. Sexual Medicine Reviews. 2019;7(2):293–305. doi: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.sxmr.2018.05.003

  16. Pompe RS, Beyer B, Haese A, Preisser F, Michl U, Steuber T, et al. Postoperative complications of contemporary open and robotassisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy using standardised reporting systems. BJU International. 2018;122(5):801–7. doi: https:// doi.org/10.1111/bju.14369

  17. Brassetti A, Bollens R. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in 2018: 20 years of worldwide experiences, experimentations, researches and refinements. Minerva Chir. 2019;74(1):37–53. doi: 10.23736/S0026-4733.18.07740-4

  18. McDonald ML, Howard LE, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, Cooperberg MR, Amling CL, et al. First postoperative PSA is associated with outcomes in patients with node positive prostate cancer: Results from the SEARCH database. Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations. 2018;36(5):239.e17-239.e25. doi: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2018.01.005

  19. Bernardes MFVG, Chagas S de C, Izidoro LC de R, Veloso DFM, Chianca TCM, Mata LRF da. Impact of urinary incontinence on the quality of life of individuals undergoing radical prostatectomy. Rev Latino-Am Enfermagem. 2019;27. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/1518- 8345.2757.3131

  20. Hashine K, Nakashima T, Iio H, Ueno Y, Shimizu S, Ninomiya I. Health-related Quality of Life in the First Year after Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy Compared with Open Radical Prostatectomy. Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology. J2014;44(7):686–91. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/jjco/hyu052

  21. Haese A, Knipper S, Isbarn H, Heinzer H, Tilki D, Salomon G, et al. A comparative study of robot-assisted and open radical prostatectomy in 10 790 men treated by highly trained surgeons for both procedures. BJU International. 2019;123(6):1031–40. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14760

  22. Nyberg M, Hugosson J, Wiklund P, Sjoberg D, Wilderäng U, Carlsson SV, et al. Functional and Oncologic Outcomes Between Open and Robotic Radical Prostatectomy at 24-month Follow-up in the Swedish LAPPRO Trial. European Urology Oncology. 2018;1(5):353– 60. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. euo.2018.04.012

  23. Cao L, Yang Z, Qi L, Chen M. Robot-assisted and laparoscopic vs open radical prostatectomy in clinically localized prostate cancer: perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes: A Systematic review and metaanalysis. Medicine. 2019;98(22):e15770. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000015770

  24. Cordeiro P, Novás S, Honorato L, Martínez- Couceiro S, García-Freire C. Prostatectomía radical laparoscópica y abierta: experiencia en nuestro centro. Revista Mexicana de Urología. 2015;75(5):247-52. doi: 10.1016/j. uromx.2015.06.005

  25. Boeri L, Capogrosso P, Ventimiglia E, Cazzaniga W, Pederzoli F, Gandaglia G, et al. Depressive Symptoms and Low Sexual Desire after Radical Prostatectomy: Early and Long- Term Outcomes in a Real-Life Setting. Journal of Urology. 2018;199(2):474–80. doi: https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.08.104

  26. Guercio C, Mehta A. Predictors of Patient and Partner Satisfaction Following Radical Prostatectomy. Sexual Medicine Reviews. 2018;6(2):295–301. doi: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.sxmr.2017.08.005




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com