BACKGROUNDLaparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) approaches have been reported for treating various kidney and pelvic procedures, and are feasible and effective in selected patients. In this study, we aimed to present the initial experience and evaluate the efficacy of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy performed through a single incision using a multichannel port.

METHODSBetween July 2010 and April 2011, six patients diagnosed with early stage prostate cancer underwent LESS radical prostatectomy (RP) in our institute. A multichannel port was inserted transperitoneally through a 2-cm umbilical incision. Specially articulating and flexible laparoscopic were used. Some technical tricks and points were applied during the operation to overcome the drawbacks and reduce the difficulties of this approach. Two continuous urethrovesical sutures in both sides were performed to complete both lateral aspects of anastomosis. The two ends of the suture threads were fixed by double Lapro-Clips, instead of the difficult knot-tying.

RESULTSTotal operative time was (265 ± 43) minutes. Mean blood loss was (230 ± 65) ml. All cases were completed successfully, without conversion to open surgery or adding additional abdomen ports. No patient required a blood transfusion and no intraoperative complications occurred. The Foley catheter was removed at the 14th day (range 12th - 16th) after surgery. At the 12th week of follow-up, all patients had an undetectable prostate-specific antigen level. Two patients used 2 or 1 pad for continence daily; other patients had achieved good continence.

CONCLUSIONIn selected cases, LESS-RP is feasible and effective; these technic points and the flexible-articulating instruments are helpful to reduce the operation difficulties.

Aged ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; methods ; Male ; Prostatectomy ; methods

Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Male ; Prostatectomy ; methods ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; surgery

Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), as a new hi-tech introduced from abroad, may bring about exactly the same results as open surgery, and is even superior to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), especially in handling the front prostate, with its advantages of minimal invasiveness, better safety, shorter operation time, less blood loss, and quicker recovery, which can be achieved through peeling off the prostate alongside the external sphincter and getting it removed in three parts or as a whole. So far, the author has accomplished more than 3 000 surgeries using this technique, without any serious complications. Any patient that can accept anesthesia and endoscopic surgery can be treated by HoLEP. This article presents an overview of the methods, skills and key points of HoLEP, gives a comprehensive analysis of HoLEP based on the anatomic features of the internal and external prostate, and offers a detailed introduction of the requirements of the operator, criteria for the accomplishment of the operation, and prevention and management of surgical damages.
Humans ; Lasers, Solid-State ; Male ; Prostate ; surgery ; Prostatectomy ; methods

OBJECTIVETo improve Madigan prostatectomy (MPC) for a much satisfactory effect in open surgery.

METHODSA total of 52 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) were treated using MPC. The MPC procedure was modified by exposing anterior prostatic urethra near the bladder neck and conjunction with cystotomy. This modified procedure preserved prostatic urethra intact and could also deal with intracystic lesions at the same time.

RESULTSThe intact of prostatic urethra was kept completely or almost for 48 cases. The hemorrhage amount during modified procedure was a less. The mean operative time was 120 minutes. The 35 patients had been followed up for 1 - 12 months. The average Qmax was 18.9 ml/s. The cystourethrography revealed that the urethra and bladder neck were intact in 8 patients postoperatively. Furthermore, the prostatic urethra was obviously wider after modified MPC.

CONCLUSIONSThe modified MPC can reduce the urethra injury and enlarge the MPC indications. The modified technique is easy to perform with little complications and much more satisfactory clinical result. The modified MPC is highly recommended.

Aged ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Prostatectomy ; methods ; Prostatic Hyperplasia ; surgery

Radical prostatectomy became a mainstay of treatment for prostate cancer in the United States after the pioneering work of Walsh in defining the nerve sparing technique. Efforts to reproduce this operation in a minimally invasive fashion resulted in slow progress that recently have flourished with the application of the daVinci Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) by Menon and colleagues. This article summarizes the origins of robotic prostatectomy, some of the current data regarding this operation and potential future directions.
Humans ; Male ; Prostatectomy/*methods ; Prostatic Neoplasms/*surgery ; *Robotics ; Surgical Procedures, Minimally Invasive/*methods

OBJECTIVETo summarize our experience with extraperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RLRP).

METHODSTwenty patients with confirmed prostate cancer by transrectal needle biopsy but no metastasis detected by radiographic examination underwent extraperitoneal RLRP, including 7 with Gleason score of less than 6, 10 with a score of 7, 2 with a score of 8, and 1 with a score of 9.

RESULTSThe procedures were performed successfully in all the patients. In 4 cases, a postoperative PSA value of more than 0.2 ng/ml at 4 weeks suggested residual tumor, for which maximal androgen block therapy was administered before elective radiotherapy. Sixteen patients were followed up for 10 to 37 months (mean 15.5 months). In the 20 cases, the operation was completed in a mean of 180 min (range 150-230 min), with the mean installation time of 48.5 min (range 40-60 min) and average blood loss of 298 ml (range 80-800 ml). The mean postoperative eating time was 1.7 days (1 to 3 days), the mean bladder catheter time was 10.7 days (7 to 14 days), and the mean hospital stay was 10.7 days (range 7-14 days). No postoperative complications occurred in these cases. Postoperative pathology showed a Gleason score no higher than 6 in 6 cases, 7 in 5 cases, and no less than 8 in 9 cases.

CONCLUSIONThe technique of extraperitoneal RLRP can be easily mastered by the surgeons and is especially advantageous for complicated pelvic operations.

Aged ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; methods ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Prostatectomy ; methods ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; surgery ; Robotics

Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; methods ; Male ; Prostate ; surgery ; Prostatectomy ; methods ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; surgery

Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is considered the first treatment of choice for local prostate cancer due to its minimal invasion advantage. To further achieve the goal of minimal invasion, single port laparoscopic radical prostatectomy has been developed to minimize the complications associated with puncture tracks. The aim of this study was to illustrate the technique for single port laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and evaluate its efficacy and safety. We reported 8 cases of radical prostatectomy with excellent early outcome carried out in Shanghai Changzheng Hospital from June 2009 to August 2009 using a home-made multiple instrument access port and adding an additional small incision at McBurney point.
Aged ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; methods ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Prostatectomy ; methods ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; surgery

OBJECTIVETo report the experience with extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (EP-LRP) in the treatment of prostate cancer.

METHODSSixty-five patients with diagnosed localized prostate cancer underwent extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

RESULTSThe procedures were successful in 64 cases. Mean operating time was 172 min (range 100 to 440 min). Mean blood loss was 340 ml (range 150 to 800 ml). Seven (10.8%) of the 65 patients received transfusion with MAP of 24 units. Rectal injury occurred in 1 patient, 2 developed urethrovesical anastomotic leakage, 6 (9.2%) had positive surgical margins, 58 (89.2%) were fully continent with urination 3 months after the operation.

CONCLUSIONEP-LRP, as a safe and feasible procedure for prostate cancer, which avoides violation of the peritoneal cavity, potentially decreases the risk of intraoperative complications and further reduces postoperative morbidity, is well worth popularizing.

Aged ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; methods ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Prostatectomy ; methods ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; surgery ; Treatment Outcome

BACKGROUNDAlthough many midterm oncologic data have been reported for extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (ELRP) in western countries, few oncologic data of the extraperitoneal procedure was published in China. The aim of the study was to evaluate the oncologic outcomes of patients treated with ELRP in China.

METHODSFrom January 2005 to March 2010, a total of 152 consecutive patients diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer were included in this study and treated with ELRP. The patients were staged according to the TNM (tumor, nodes, metastases) system. Median and mean postoperative follow-up were 28.1 months and 27.0 months, respectively. The patients were retrospectively analyzed for progression-free survival.

RESULTSOne hundred and twelve cases (73.7%) were postoperatively diagnosed as pT2 in, and 40 cases (26.3%) as pT3. Positive lymph nodes were shown in 5 patients (3.3%). Gleason score was < 7 in 49 men (32.2%), 7 in 69 men (45.4%), and > 7 in 34 men (22.4%). Positive surgical margins (PSM) were observed in 15 patients (9.9%), which included 32.0% of all pT3a cases and 46.7% of all pT3b cases, respectively. The overall prostate-specific antigen recurrence-free survival rate was 86% in all patients. The recurrence-free survival rates were 91.8% and 62.2% in pT2N0 patients and pT3N0 patients, respectively. Preoperative prostate-specific antigen, surgical margins, tumor stage, and lymph nodal status were identified as independent predictors of biochemical recurrence-free survival using multivariate Cox proportional hazard model.

CONCLUSIONSELRP is a precise, safe and effective procedure at this particular Chinese institution. The prognostic power of prostate-specific antigen relapse after ELRP is not identical to that described previously with transperitoneal or open retropubic approaches.

Aged ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; methods ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Prostate ; surgery ; Prostatectomy ; methods ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; surgery ; Treatment Outcome