A comparative study of Retzius-sparing technique with veil of Aphrodite technique nerve sparing robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1000-6702.2017.06.008
- VernacularTitle:机器人辅助腹腔镜下根治性前列腺切除术保留耻骨后间隙技术与阿芙罗狄蒂面纱保留神经技术的比较研究
- Author:
Xiaochen ZHOU
;
Bin FU
;
Weipeng LIU
;
Cheng ZHANG
;
Ju GUO
;
Enjun LEI
;
Gongxian WANG
- Keywords:
Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP);
Retzius-sparing technique;
Veil of Aphrodite technique;
Postoperative continence
- From:
Chinese Journal of Urology
2017;38(6):428-432
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To introduce the technique and report our initial experience of Retziussparing robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) and compare perioperative outcomes with the standard veil of Aphrodite technique (Veil technique).Methods nineteen Retzius-sparing RALP and 20 Veil nerve sparing RALP with posterior reconstruction for T1c to T2c prostate cancer performed by a single surgical team between 2015 January and 2016 December were retrospectively reviewed.Preoperative data of patients in Retzius-sparing group [patient age (66.3 ± 5.9) years,BMI (25.5 ± 3.1) kg/m2,tPSA (16.4 ± 5.0) ng/ml,biopsy Gleason score 6 (5-7),prostate volume (32.7 ± 7.4) ml and IIEF-5 score 14(5-18)] and Veil group[patient age (64.6 ±7.3) years,BMI (25.5 ±2.0) kg/m2,tPSA (18.5 ± 11.0) ng/ml,biopsy Gleason score 7(5-8),prostate volume (31.4± 10.8)ml and IIEF-5 score 15(6-19)].No significant difference was found between the two group in the above parameters (all P ＞ 0.05).All patients were continent preoperatively.Retzius-sparing RALP and Veil nerve sparing RALP were performed via transperitoneal RALP.Operative time,estimated blood loss,postoperative hospital stay,postoperative staging,postoperative Gleason score,return of urinary continence and postoperative IIEF-5 score of the two groups were statistically analyzed.Results All 39 cases were successfully performed robotically without conversion,transfusion or other major intraoperative and postoperative complications.Postoperative pathology confirmed pT2a 5 cases,pT2b 8 cases and pT2c 6 cases in Retzius-sparing group and pT2a 7 cases,pT2b 5 cases and pT2c 8 cases in Veil group (all P ＞ 0.05).For Retzius group,operative time was (106.5 ± 26.4) min and estimated blood loss was (48.9 ± 20.2) ml;for Veil group,operative time was (93.2± 20.8) min and estimated blood loss was (42.5 ± 16.8) ml.No significant difference was found in the above parameters (all P ＞ 0.05).Urethral catheter was removed at postoperative 7-day (Retzius-sparing group) and 21-day (Veil group),respectively.18 patients in Retzius-sparing group achieved urinary continence (0 pads) immediately after the removal of urinary catheter,while 1 patient returned to full continence in 2 weeks postoperatively.Patients in Veil group returned to continence (6.8 ± 3.6) weeks postoperatively (P ＜ 0.001).At 3-month follow up,IIEF-5 score was 14 (4-16) in Retziussparing group and 14 (4-18) in Veil group;no significant changes was noted in preoperative and postoperative IIEF-5 score in both groups,or in postoperative IIEF-5 scores in the two groups (P ＞ 0.05).No sign of tumor recurrence was appreciated for all cases (tPSA ＜ 0.2 ng/ml) during follow-up of 6 months (3 to 12 months).Conclusions Retzius-sparing RALP and the Veil nerve sparing RALP were both effective for the surgical treatment of localized prostate cancer.Our data revealed no statistical difference in perioperative outcomes between the two approaches,however,the Retzius-sparing technique seemed to yield a better outcome regarding early return to urinary continence postoperatively.
