Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy without Proctorship: Early Experience of the First Series in Asia
Abstract
Introduction: Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy has been shown to provide best surgical outcomes in terms of potency and continence. Robotic prostatectomy program was started at Siriraj Hospital without proctorship. Early result of the author's experience was evaluated.
Objective: To evaluate the feasibility of Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy performed at the author's institute without proctorship.
Materials and Methods: From February 2007 to June 2007, 15 patients with localized prostate cancer underwent robotic prostatectomy by one surgeon (the author). Perioperative data were evaluated.
Results: All patients successfully underwent the operation. Mean operating time was 263 minutes. Average blood loss was 825 ml. There was no conversion to open or laparoscopic prostatectomy in the series. One patient required a suprapubic cystostomy tube due to high tension at the vesico-urethral anastomotic site.
Conclusions: Early experience of robotic prostatectomy without proctorship has shown that it is feasible in robotic-naive-experience surgeon. However, oncological outcome can be improved when more experience is gained. Long term follow-up is needed to evaluate functional outcome including potency and incontinence rate.
References
2. Nualyong C, Srinualnad S, Taweemonkongsap T, Amornvesukit T. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: preliminary result of Thailand series. J Med Assoc Thai 2006;89:1440-6.
3. Srinualnad S, Nualyong C, Udompunturak S, Kongsuwan W. Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE): a new approach for treatment of localized prostate cancer. J Med Assoc Thai 2006;89:1601-8.
4. Abbou CC, Hoznek A, Salomon L, Oisson LE, Lobontiu A, Saint F, et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with a remote controlled robot, J Urol 2001:165 (6 Pt 1):1964-6,
5. Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A, Sarle R, Hemal A, Peabody JO, et al.Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy; establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes. J Urol 2002;168:945-9.
6. Ahlering TE, Skarecky D, Borin J, Impact of cautery versus cautery-free preservation of neurovascular bundles on early return of potency, J Endourol 2006;20:586-9.
7. Menon M, Shrivastava A, Sarle R, Hemal A, Tewari A. Vattikuti Institute Prostatectomy: a single-team experience of 100 cases. J Endourol 2003;17:785-90,
8. Ahlering TE, Eichel L, Edwards RA, Lee DI, Skarecky DW. Robotic radical prostatectomy: a technique to reduce pT2 positive margins. Urology 2004;64:1224-8.
9. Kaul S, Savera A, Badani K, Fumo M, Bhandari A, Menon M. Functional outcomes and oncological efficacy of Vattikutti Institute prostatectomy with Veil of Aphrodite nerve-sparing; an analysis of 154 consecutive patients. Br J Urol Int 2006; M97:467-72.
10. Savera AT, Kaul S, Badani K, Stark AT, Shah NL, Menon M. Robotic radical prostatectomy with the Veil of Aphrodite" technique: histologic evidence of enhanced nerve sparing. Eur Urol 2006;49:1065-73, discussion 73-4.
11. Tewari AK, Rao SR, Anatomical foundations and surgical maneuvers for precise identification of the prostatovesical junction during robotic radical prostatectomy. Br J Urol Int 2006;98:833-7.
12. Zorn KC, Gofrit ON, Orvieto MA, Mikhail AA, Zagaja GP, Shalhav AL, Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy; functional and pathologic outcomes with interfascial nerve preservation. Eur Urol 2007:51:755-62, discussion 63.
13. Menon M, Shrivastava A, Kaul S, Badani KK, Fumo M, Bhandari M, et al. Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: contemporary technique and analysis of results, Eur Urol 2007;51:648-57, discussion 57-8.
14. Bhandari A, Mclntire L, Kaul SA, Hemal AK, Peabody JO, Menon M, Perioperative complications of robotic radical prostatectomy after the learning curve. J Urol 2005;174:915-8
15. Hu JC, Nelson RA, Wilson TG, Kawachi MH, Ramin SA, Lau C, et al. Perioperative complications of laparoscopic and robotic assisted Iaparoscopic radical prostatectomy, J Urol 2006;175:541-6, discussion 6.
16. Joseph JV, Vicente I, Madeb R, Erturk E, Patel HR. Robot-assisted vs pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy; are there any differences? Br J Urol Int 2005;96:39-42.
17. Atug F, Castle EP, Srivastav SK, Burgess SV, Thomas R, Davis R. Positive surgical margins in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: impact of learning curve on oncologic outcomes. Eur Urol 2006;49:866-71, discussion 71-2.
18. Herrell SD, Smith JA, Jr. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: what is the learning curve? Urology 2005;66(Suppl 5):105-7.
19. Burgess SV, Atug F, Castle EP, Davis R, Thomas R. Cost Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE): a new approach for treatment of localized prostate cancer. J Med Assoc Thai 2006;89:1601-8. analysis of radical retropubic, perineal, and robotic prostatectomy. J Endourol 2006;20:827-30.
20. Nelson B, Kaufman M, Broughton G, Cookson MS, Chang SS, Herrell SD, et al. Comparison of length of hospital stay between radical retropubic prostatectomy and robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. J Urol 2007;177:929-31.
21. Rassweiler J, Hruza M, Teber D, Su LM. Laparoscopic and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy--critical analysis of the results. Eur Urol 2006;49:612-24.
22. Rozet F, Harmon J, Cathelineau X, Barret E, Vallancien G. Robot-assisted versus pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. World J Urol 2006;24:171-9.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Articles must be contributed solely to The Thai Journal of Surgery and when published become the property of the Royal College of Surgeons of Thailand. The Royal College of Surgeons of Thailand reserves copyright on all published materials and such materials may not be reproduced in any form without the written permission.
