Extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: comparison of three-port versus four-port surgeries
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1000-6702.2015.08.009
- VernacularTitle:三孔法与四孔法经腹膜外途径腹腔镜下根治性前列腺切除术的比较
- Author:
Zhuo LIU
;
Yisen MENG
;
Wei YU
;
Jie JIN
;
Qian ZHANG
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Prostatic neoplasms;
Radical prostatectomy;
Extraperitoneal approach;
Laparoscopes
- From:
Chinese Journal of Urology
2015;36(8):595-599
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To compare the perioperative outcomes and short-term efficacy of three-port extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (ELRP) and four-port ELRP.Methods Two hundred patients who had undergone ELRP for prostate cancer by a single surgeon from November 2010 to October 2014 were retrospectively analyzed.Among them,95 cases underwent three-port ELRP and 105 cases underwent four-port ELRP.On the basis of traditional four-port ELRP,three-port ELRP was characterized by the omission of the trocar on the inner side of right anterior superior iliac spine.The mean age was 66.8 ± 15.5 years,and mean total prostate specific antigen (tPSA) was 15.3 ± 12.4 μg/L.There were no significant differences including age,body mass index,tPSA,clinical stages,acceptance of neoadjuvant hormone therapy,history of transurethral resection of the prostate,history of diabetes mellitus between the 2 groups (P ＞ 0.05).Patients in three-port ELRP group had significantly smaller prostate volume than fourport group (35.6 ± 16.7 ml versus 42.2 ± 24.7 ml,P ＜ 0.05).The clinical factors as operative time,estimated blood loss,hospital stay,drainage tube keeping days,pathological Gleason scores,pathological stages,positive surgical margin rates,biochemical recurrence rates and urinary incontinence rates were compared between the 2 groups.Results The three-port group had significantly shorter operative time than the four-port group (81.0 ± 18.6 min versus 103.6 ±34.6 min),less estimated blood loss (102.6 ±75.8 ml versus 217.5 ± 182.9 ml),less positive surgical margin rates (13.7％ versus 27.6％).There were 9 patients having Gleason scores more than 7 in the three-port ELRP group and 29 patients in four-port ELRP group (P ＜ 0.05).There were no significant differences of hospital stay,drainage tube keeping days,pathological stages between the 2 groups (P ＞ 0.05).Eighty-three cases in the three-port ELRP group (87.4％) were followed up for 5-19 months with the median time of 11 months.Ninety-two cases in fourport ELRP group (87.6％) were followed up for 17-52 months and the median time was 27 months.There were no significant differences of biochemical recurrence rates and urinary incontinence rates between the 2 groups(P ＞ 0.05).Conclusions Compared to four-port ELRP,three-port ELRP can provide shorter operative time,less blood loss,better negative surgical margin rates,similar oncological control and recovery of postoperative continence.In experienced hands,three-port ELRP could be a feasible and effective option for localized prostate cancer.
