The modification of laparoscopic and endovideoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy

Authors

  • S.A. Vozianov Institute of Urology of the National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Ukraine
  • S.N. Shamrayev Institute of Urology of the National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Ukraine
  • A.M. Leonenko Institute of Urology of the National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Ukraine

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26641/2307-5279.21.4.2017.149765

Keywords:

prostate cancer, miniinvasive, laparoscopic, endovideoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy, vesico-urethral anastamosis, complications

Abstract

The aim of the study is to improve the technique of formation of vesico-urethral anastamosis (VUA) in the performance of endoscopic radical prostatectomy (ERPE) and evaluate its immediate results. Material and methods. In this study, there are estimated the immediate results of various methods for the formation of VUA in patients with localized prostate cancer (n=101) who were undergone a radical surgical intervention in one center of the third level of medical care for 2015–2016 years. The patients were divided into three groups. Group I included 24 (23,8%) patients who had undergone a modified ERPE. Group II involved 49 (48,5%) patients who had undergone the formation of VUA by the method of R.F. Van Velthoven. Group III inserted 28 (27,7%) patients, in which the formation of VUA were occurred in the way of J.-U. Stolzenburg. More than 75 parameters (clinical, biochemical, pathological, results of instrumental research, etc.) were analyzed for each patient. Complications were divided: by the number; by severity according to the scale P.A. Clavien et al. (2009); by type for G. Novara et al. (2010); by prognostic group formed by P.M. Pierorazio et al. (2013). The data are processed using parametric and nonparametric statistics (Shapiro-Wilk test, Mann-Whitey test, chi-squared test, Fisher’s exact test). Results. The median time of catheterization of the bladder in the group of the new method of VUA was 7 (7; 10) days and was 41,7% less than the similar indicator in the group of single-row running suture of VUA – 12 (10; 14,5) days (p<0,001) and 26,3% less than in the group of single-row interrupted VUA – 9,5 (7; 15,5) days (p<0,05). The investigated method of EPRE illustrates less blood loss than ERPE with the formation of VUA by the method of Van Velthoven: 200 (150; 300) vs 400 (200; 600) ml (p<0,01), the corresponding volume of blood loss in a group of patients operated using the method of J.-U. Stolzenburg was 225 (150; 300) ml (p>0,05). The number of genitourinary complications in the ERPE with the implementation of the proposed method for the formation of VUA was 33,3±9,6% and was statistically significantly lower than that in group with the running suture VUA: 65,3 ± 6,8% (p=0,013) mainly due to the occasional occurrence of leakage of VUA (p=0,047) and decrease in the frequency of postoperative urinary incontinence (p=0,041). Despite a greater number of genitourinary complications in the group of single-row interrupted suture – 57,1±9,4%, statistically, the group of single-row and two-row interrupted sutures of VUA did not differ (p=0,102). In all groups of patients, the “small” complications of P.A. Clavien predominate, so for group I, this figure was 37,5%, for group II – 75,5% and 64,3% for the group III. In patients of all studied groups as a concomitant disease, the diseases of the cardiovascular system were dominated. Conclusions. The data, which were obtained from this study on the reduction of the number of postoperative complications during the implementation of a new method for the formation of VUA in the ERPE, indicate the prospect of further study of this problem in terms of minimizing of the complications of ERPE and improving the quality of life of patients with prostate cancer.

References

Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2010 / A. Jemal, R. Siegel, J. Xu, E. Ward // CA: A Cancer Journal for clinicians. – 2010. – V. 60, N 5. – P. 277–300.

Brawley O.W. Prostate cancer epidemiology in the United States / O.W. Brawley // World Journal of Urology. – 2012. – V. 30, N 2. – P. 195–200.

Amling C.L. Relationship between obesity and race in predicting adverse pathologic variables in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy / C.L. Amling, C.J. Kane, R.H. Riffenburgh [et al.] // Urology. – 2001. – V. 58, N 5. – P. 723–728.

Song C. Prostate cancer in Korean men exhibits poor differentiation and is adversely related to prognosis after radical prostatectomy / C. Song, J.Y. Ro, M.-S. Lee [et al.] // Urology. – 2006. – V. 68, N 4. – P. 820–824.

Бюлетень національного канцер-реєстру України. – 2015. – № 17. – С. 54–55.

Возіанов С.О. Рак передміхурової залози / С.О. Возіанов, О.В. Шуляк, С.М. Шамраєв. – Львів: Кварт, 2011. – 381 с.

Wallerstedt A. Outcomes after surgical treatment of localized prostate cancer with focus on urinary incontinence and short term complications / A. Wallerstedt. – Inst fцr molekylдr medicin och kirurgi / Dept of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, 2015. – 77 p.

Boxer R.J. Radical prostatectomy for carcinoma of the prostate: 1951-1976. a review of 329 patients. / R.J. Boxer, J.J. Kaufman, W.E. Goodwin // The Journal of Urology. – 1977. – V. 117, N 2. – P. 208–213.

Reiner W.G. An anatomical approach to the surgical management of the dorsal vein and Santorini’s plexus during radical retropubic surgery / W.G. Reiner, P.C. Walsh // The Journal of Urology. – 1979. – V. 121, N 2. – P. 198–200.

Walsh P.C. Anatomic radical prostatectomy: evolution of the surgical technique / P.C. Walsh // The Journal of Urology. – 1998. – V. 160, N 6. – P. 2418–2424.

Schuessler W.W. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short-term experience / W.W. Schuessler, P.G. Schulam, R.V. Clayman, L.R. Kavoussi // Urology. – 1997. – V. 50, N 6. – P. 854–857.

Raboy A. Early experience with extraperitoneal endoscopic radical retropubic prostatectomy / A. Raboy, P. Albert, G. Ferzli // Surgical endoscopy. – 1998. – V. 12, N 10. – P. 1264–1267.

Bianco F.J. Radical prostatectomy: long-term cancer control and recovery of sexual and urinary function (“trifecta”) / F.J. Bianco, P.T. Scardino, J.A. Eastham // Urology. – 2005. – V. 66, N 5. – P. 83–94.

Ploussard G. Prospective evaluation of combined oncological and functional outcomes after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: trifecta rate of achieving continence, potency and cancer control at 2 years. / G. Ploussard, A. de la Taille, E. Xylinas [et al.] // Bju International. – 2011. – V. 107, N 2. – P. 274–279.

Xylinas E. Evaluation of combined oncological and functional outcomes after radical prostatectomy: trifecta rate of achieving continence, potency and cancer control – a literature review / E. Xylinas, G. Ploussard, X. Durand [et al.] // Urology. – 2010. – V. 76, N 5. – P. 1194–1198.

Patel V. R. Pentafecta: a new concept for reporting outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy / V.R. Patel, A. Sivaraman, R.F. Coelho [et al.] // Eur. Urology. – 2011. – V. 59, N 5. – P. 702–707.

Good D.W. Analysis of the pentafecta learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy / D.W. Good, G.D. Stewart, J.U. Stolzenburg, S.A. McNeill // World Journal of Urology. – 2014. – V. 32, N 5. – P. 1225–1233.

Sivaraman A. A new concept in reporting outcomes of robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the octafecta / A. Sivaraman, S. Chauhan, O. Schatloff [et al.] // European Urology Supplements. – 2011. – V. 10, N 8. – P. 551.

Раснер П.И. Сравнительный анализ функциональных результатов радикальной позадилонной и робот-ассистированной простатэктомии у больных локализованным раком предстательной железы / П.И. Раснер, Д.В. Котенко, К.Б. Колонтарев, Д.Ю. Пушкарь // Экспериментальная и клиническая урология. – 2014. – Том 4. – С. 26–30.

С.О. Возіанов, С.М. Шамраєв, А.М. Леоненко, А.Ю. Гурженко, О.С. Возіанов. Пат. на корисну модель № 114844 Україна, МПК (2006):A61B 17/00, A61B 17/04 (2006.01), A61B 17/94 (2006.01). Спосіб формування везико-уретрального анастамозу при радикальній простатектомії; ДУ «ІУНАМНУ» (UA). – № u201608999; заявл. 23.08.2016; Опубл. 27.03.2017. – Бюл. № 6.

Van Velthoven R.F. Technique for laparoscopic running urethrovesical anastomosis: the single knot method / R.F. Van Velthoven, T.E. Ahlering, A. Peltier [et al.] // Urology. – 2003. – V. 61, N 4. – P. 699–702.

Stolzenburg J.-U. The endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE): technique and initial experience / J.-U. Stolzenburg, M. Do, H. Pfeiffer [et al.] // World Journal of Urology. – 2002. – V. 20, N 1. – P. 48–55.

Clavien P.A. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience / P.A. Clavien, J. Barkun, M.L. de Oliveira [et al.] // Annals of Surgery. – 2009. – V. 250, N 2. – P. 187–196.

Yoon P.D. Use of Clavien-Dindo classification in reporting and grading complications after urological surgical procedures: analysis of 2010 to 2012 / P.D. Yoon, V. Chalasani, H.H. Woo // The Journal of Urology. – 2013. – V. 190, N 4. – P. 1271–1274.

Pierorazio P.M. Prognostic Gleason grade grouping: data based on the modified Gleason scoring system: prognostic Gleason grade grouping / P.M. Pierorazio, P.C. Walsh, A.W. Partin, J.I. Epstein // BJU International. – 2013. – V. 111, N 5. – P. 753–760.

Novara G. Prospective evaluation with standardised criteria for postoperative complications after robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy / G. Novara, V. Ficarra, C. D’Elia [et al.] // Eur. Urol. – 2010. – V. 57, N 3. – P. 363–370.

Porzionato A. Histotopographic study of the rectourethralis muscle / A. Porzionato, V. Macchi, M. Gardi [et al.] // Clinical Anatomy. – 2005. – V. 18, N 7. – P. 510–517.

Brooks J.D. Anatomy of the rectourethralis muscle / J.D. Brooks, S.E. Eggener, W.-M. Chao // Eur. Urol. – 2002. – V. 41, N 1. – P. 94–100.

Гржибовский А.М. Анализ номинальных данных (независимые наблюдения) / А.М. Гржибовский // Экология человека. – 2008. – № 6. – С. 58–68.

Motulsky H. Intuitive biostatistics / H. Motulsky. – New York: Oxford University, 1995. — P. 386.

Downloads

Published

2018-12-06

Issue

Vol. 21 No. 4 (2017)

Section

Oncourology

License

Стаття повинна мати візу керівника та офіційне направлення від установи, з якої виходить стаття (з круглою печаткою), і вказівкою, чи є стаття дисертаційною, а також у довільній формі на окремому аркуші - відомості про авторів (прізвище, ім’я, по батькові, посада, вчений ступінь, місце роботи, адреса, контактні телефони, E-mail).

Стаття повина бути підписана всіма авторами, які укладають з редакцією договір пропередачу авторських прав (заповнюється на кожного автора окремо з оригінальним підписом). За таких умов редакція має право на її публікацію та розміщення на сайті видавництва.