Radical laparoscopic prostatectomy: should we do bladder neck preservation or a reconstruction?
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Journal Article↗
Biomedical subjects
András Hoznek
Publications and source records attributed to András Hoznek.
Simulation training in video-assisted urologic surgery.
The current system of surgical education is facing many challenges in terms of time efficiency, costs, and patient safety. Training using simulation is an emerging area, mostly based on the experience of other high-risk professions like aviation. The goal of simulation-based training in surgery is to develop not only technical but team skills. This learning environment is stress-free and safe, allows standardization and tailoring of training, and also objectively evaluate performances. The development of simulation training is straightforward in endourology, since these procedures are video-assisted and the low degree of freedom of the instruments is easily replicated. On the other hand, these interventions necessitate a long learning curve, training in the operative room is especially costly and risky. Many models are already in use or under development in all fields of video-assisted urologic surgery: ureteroscopy, percutaneous surgery, transurethral resection of the prostate, and laparoscopy. Although bench models are essential, simulation increasingly benefits from the achievements and development of computer technology. Still in its infancy, virtual reality simulation will certainly belong to tomorrow's teaching tools.
Clinical Competence↗
Update on laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Laparoscopic and robotic-assisted prostatectomy have been proposed as alternatives to traditional open retropubic prostatectomy. In this review, we update the more recent data concerning the results, technical trends and controversies regarding these novel, minimally invasive procedures. RECENT FINDINGS: As a result of improved patient selection, a better understanding of surgical anatomy, and refinements in surgical techniques, traditional retropubic prostatectomy set the standards very high, leaving little room for improvement. In this review, the results of laparoscopic prostatectomy are compared with contemporary in addition to historical series. Besides the transperitoneal laparoscopic approach, which was almost exclusively used in the initial series, the introduction and development of the extraperitoneal laparoscopic approach meant a significant change in the surgical strategy of a number of teams worldwide. The relative merits of the transperitoneal and extraperitoneal approaches are discussed. Robotic radical prostatectomy is a promising technical innovation that allows us to overcome many of the inherent limitations of laparoscopic surgery. As a result of financial constraints, the experience has been limited to a few centres worldwide. SUMMARY: Although long-term results are still lacking, novel minimally invasive techniques seem to fulfil the highest standards of radical prostatectomy in terms of early oncological cure, functional results and morbidity. A standardization of data collection and evaluation methodology will be indispensable for a better comparison of the different series.
Blood Loss, Surgical↗
Justification of extraperitoneal laparoscopic access for surgery of the upper urinary tract.
Laparoscopic surgery was originally developed by gynecologists and general surgeons. Based on their experience, the first successful laparoscopic procedures in urology were performed transperitoneally. However, this novel technique transformed traditionally retroperitoneal procedures into transperitoneal procedures, giving free rein to distinct intraperitoneal complications. Retroperitoneal laparoscopy was a later development in urology. This approach has gained increasing popularity throughout the years and has challenged the transperitoneal laparoscopic route in many aspects. This review focuses on the advantages of retroperitoneal laparoscopic surgery of the upper urinary tract.
Clinical Competence↗
Comparison of early oncologic results of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by extraperitoneal versus transperitoneal approach.
PURPOSE: Compare the early oncological results of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy performed by either an extraperitoneal or a transperitoneal approach. METHODS: 330 consecutive men underwent laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer, the first 165 by transperitoneal approach, and the last 165 by extraperitoneal approach. Clinical stage, serum PSA, Gleason score of biopsy were recorded, as well as operating time, surgical and medical complications, blood loss, length of hospital stay and catheterization time. The weight of the specimen, pathological stage (1997 TNM classification) and status of the surgical margins were noted. The Fisher test as well as the chi2-test were used for statistical analysis. Differences were considered significant when p < 0.05. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of preoperative characteristics except for Gleason score of the biopsies which was higher in the extraperitoneal group (p < 0.0001). The operating time was longer with the transperitoneal approach (248.5 min vs. 220.0 min, p < 0.0001). There was no difference in transfusion rate (1.2% vs. 5.4%, transperitoneal vs. extraperitoneal, respectively, p = 0.6). There was no difference in hospital stay, medical and surgical complications. Respectively, in the transperitoneal and extraperitoneal groups, there were 108 and 88 pT2 tumors. There were no differences in terms of positive surgical margins between the two groups, 23% and 29.7% (p = 0.21) overall, 13.0% and 17.0% (p = 0.42) in pT2 tumors and 43.6% and 44.7% (p = 0.99) in pT3 tumors. CONCLUSIONS: Extraperitoneal approach offers the same early oncological results as transperitoneal approach with a shorter operative time.
Humans↗
Robotic renal surgery.
Robotic technology is an expansion of laparoscopic surgery. Robots can be conceived of as specialized laparoscopic tools; their aim is to improve dexterity of the operating surgeon, and therefore they correspond to computer-enhanced telemanipulator devices. For the patient, the advantage of robotic surgery is essentially the advantage of the laparoscopic approach. It gives surgeons tremendous benefits, however, with its intuitive Endowrist and dexterity. From the patient perspective, the biggest difference is between an open operation and one that uses minimally invasive techniques. The contribution of robotics to the evolution of surgery will be obvious if these new systems increase the number of conventionally trained surgeons performing more complex operations using minimally invasive surgical techniques, or if the outcome data from different centers worldwide suggest that the use of advanced technology permits surgeons to have augmented technical performance.
Forecasting↗
Laparoscopic and robotic surgical training in urology.
The most important change in urology during the past decade was the development of minimally invasive surgery, particularly laparoscopy. However, the main drawback of laparoscopy is a steep learning curve, which results from the significant changes in the surgical environment. Although laparoscopy can provide important advantages for the patient, including decreased length of hospitalization, decreased analgesic requirement, and a shortened postoperative convalescence, one concern has been whether laparoscopic techniques should be learned solely in the operating room. For example, sports, music, and aviation are practiced before an actual performance is ever undertaken. In this review, the advantages and limitations of all available training modalities in minimally invasive surgery are described. Testing basic laparoscopic skills on inanimate models, becoming familiar with the principles of dissection and hemostasis on living animals, and studying surgical anatomy on cadavers should be considered as indispensable and complementary elements for laparoscopic training in the future. In addition, telementoring with the help of modern image processing and virtual reality eventually may become the basis of tomorrow's surgical instruction.
Clinical Competence↗
Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of the extraperitoneal approach using the da Vinci robotic system.
PURPOSE: We developed and assessed the feasibility of extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy performed using the da Vinci (Intuitive Surgical, Mountain View, California) robotic system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In June 2002, 4 consecutive patients with clinically localized prostate cancer underwent extraperitoneal, robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. After development of the extraperitoneal space the surgeon performed laparoscopic prostatectomy from the remote control unit. The assistant aligned and exchanged robotic instruments and used conventional laparoscopic instruments to facilitate prostatectomy. Perioperative data and pathological results were recorded. RESULTS: No difficulties were noted when developing the extraperitoneal space. All additional steps were successfully performed with telerobotics. More distal placement of the robotic ports appeared to improve the feasibility of the extraperitoneal approach. The peritoneum acted as a natural bowel retractor and the distal port placement facilitated use of the assistant ports. Mean operative time was 274 minutes (range 124 to 360). Mean catheterization time and hospital stay were 2.7 and 5.3 days, respectively. A positive margin was observed in 1 patient and pathological stage was pT2 in 3 and pT3 in 1. No postoperative complications or open conversions were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The extraperitoneal approach was feasible with the da Vinci robotic system. Distal port placement for the robot appeared to create an ergonomic environment for the surgeon and assistant and more direct prostatic access. While additional clinical experience is required, the extraperitoneal approach may ultimately provide advantages for robotic and nonrobotic laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.
Aged↗
Cadaveric versus porcine models in urological laparoscopic training.
INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopy performed on anesthetized pigs is an established training model. In this pilot study, we performed laparoscopy on cadavers as a training modality for urologists participating in a laparoscopic seminar. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We compared data from two consecutive laparoscopy seminars performed at our institution. The first included a laparoscopy session performed on pigs. The second was in the same setup, yet laparoscopy was performed on fresh cadavers. We analyzed and compared the trainees' perspectives regarding the 2 modalities using a 5-scale satisfaction questionnaire. RESULTS: Seven trainees attended the cadaveric and 9 the porcine laparoscopy session. The two groups were similar in terms of age and previous laparoscopic and urological experience. The general satisfaction of the two training modalities was high in the two groups, as well as their will for another session of the same kind. Yet the trainees ranked their understanding of the surgical anatomy, laparoscopic technique and use of instruments significantly higher in the cadaveric laparoscopy group (p values were 0.007, 0.006 and 0.032, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Cadaveric laparoscopy may offer an ideal surgical environment allowing dissection and performance of complete procedures. In this pilot study, we conducted the first reported cadaveric laparoscopy training seminar in urology. The trainees preferred the cadaveric laparoscopy and found it superior to porcine laparoscopy. We believe that cadaveric laparoscopy is an important training tool, which may be added to the armamentarium of urological laparoscopy training courses.
Adult↗
Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.
Laparoscopy has become an integral part of urologic surgery. Its indications have been progressively extended to the most advanced oncologic and reconstructive procedures. Within this frame, radical prostatectomy is of major interest, especially considering the incidence and clinical significance of prostate cancer. The procedure comprises several steps of challenging dissection in which the preservation of delicate nerve and muscular structures should be conciliated with safe tumor excision. The intervention ends with vesicourethral anastomosis, which is considered the most difficult reconstructive procedure in urologic laparoscopy. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy has gradually become a wholly standardized procedure, and it is now routinely performed in several centers throughout the world.
Humans↗
Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: published series.
Next to the retropubic and perineal approaches, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy has become the third most common technique in the surgical treatment of localized prostate cancer. Although long-term oncologic data are still lacking, based on several contemporary series, it seems likely that oncologic results will fulfill expectations. Over the past decade, quality-of-life issues have come into the spotlight in oncologic surgery in particular. In this regard, the aim of the laparoscopic technique is to become the best in terms of operative stress, postoperative morbidity, catheterization time, and return to normal activities. The unique intraoperative visibility and magnification of the operative field allow ultraprecise dissection and suturing of vital neural and sphincteric structures. Will the use of this new kind of surgery translate into better functional results? The goal of this review is to analyze the published results of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in the context of its rapidly evolving open surgical counterpart.
Erectile Dysfunction↗
Laparoscopic retroperitoneal nephrectomy for Aspergillus-infected polycystic kidney.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The management of polycystic kidney disease is mostly restricted to conservative measures. However, nephrectomy may be indicated in particular cases, especially when there are infective complications. To decrease the morbidity of the procedure, the laparoscopic approach has become appealing. We present a laparoscopic retroperitoneal approach to complicated polycystic kidney disease in a high-risk patient. CASERESPORT: We performed right retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy in a 39-year-old man who had autosomal polycystic kidney disease and had undergone heart transplantation. The immunosuppressed patient presented with severe flank pain, generalized signs of infection, and acute renal insufficiency. With the patient in the right lateral decubitus position, the retroperitoneal space was entered by the open technique, and the posterior pararenal space was developed with finger dissection. Five trocars were used. After the renal vessels had been secured and divided, the cysts were successively punctured, gradually shrinking the operative specimen. The kidney was placed in an Endo-catch and removed after morcellation, with no need to enlarge the 2-cm lumbotomy. The operating time was 80 minutes, and the hospital stay was 4 days. Histologic examination revealed a polycystic kidney with Aspergillus infection. CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic approach is a less-invasive option for removing a polycystic kidney when nephrectomy is indicated. The retroperitoneal route has the advantage of minimizing infection risks because of the absence of peritoneal opening.
Adult↗