PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11402593

Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: technique.

Abstract

Ongoing progress in laparoscopy has permitted extension of its indications for performance of complex oncologic and reconstructive surgeries such as radical prostatectomy. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is now feasible when performed by urologists trained in laparoscopy. Although the procedure is technically rewarding, it is more important to evaluate it in regards to efficacy. The short-term oncologic and functional efficacy rates (regarding urinary continence) seem equivalent to the rates for open surgery. Longer follow-up is needed to assess the preservation of potency with the laparoscopic technique. The integration and application of open nerve-sparing techniques to the laparoscopic approach should be feasible owing to the excellent visual accuracy at the prostatic apex. Initially, the operating time is lengthy (> 7 hours), but the length improves considerably with each series of 20 or more cases. Overall, the learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is approximately 50 cases. Whether the laparoscopic approach will ever be as time efficient for the urologist as open radical prostatectomy remains to be seen. The authors' preliminary impression from the patient's perspective is that laparoscopic prostatectomy may offer significant advantages over open surgery in terms of the immediate postoperative quality-of-life concerns.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

I S Gill, C D Zippe. 2001. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: technique.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0094-0143(05)70150-6

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

The Trendelenburg position: a review of current slants about head down tilt.

The steep head down tilt surgical posture, popularized in the 1870s by Trendelenburg as a means of improving access to pelvic pathology and espoused by the American physiologist, Walter Cannon, during World War I as a resuscitative position with which to treat shock, has a history of widespread, ritualistic acceptance. An awake patient placed in steep head down tilt usually objects to the posture after only a short time. Now recognized as potentially harmful in the presence of cardiac, pulmonary, ocular, and central nervous system pathology and essentially useless for vascular resuscitation, steep tilt should be limited to selected circumstances in which alternatives are unacceptable. Shallow head down tilt, a more recent variety, also offers serious questions about its surgical usefulness as well as its applicability for patients with diseased hearts, lungs, and heads. As an aid to resuscitative procedures, the contoured supine position offers assets that merit serious consideration. Means of restraining a tilted patient on an operating table include wristlets, shoulder braces, and bent knees with ankle restraints. Considerations that aid in the selection of head down tilt are presented, as is a plea for the abandonment of the Trendelenburg eponym and a suggestion for future investigation.

Head-Down Tilt↗