Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Extraperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a single-center experience beyond the learning curve

  • Topic paper
  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To report our surgical technique and outcomes after extraperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP).

Materials and methods

At Henri Mondor’s Hospital, we performed the first RALRP in 2001 and started to perform routinely RALRP since 2006. Preoperative characteristics, perioperative parameters, functional and oncological outcomes were collected in a prospective database and studied. All parameters were tested in patients undergoing RALRP beyond the learning curve of each surgeon. The overall cohort included 792 patients.

Results

RALRP offers interesting results in terms of hospital stay, operative time, and blood loss. The overall rate of complications was low, especially concerning the rates of anastomosis’ complications. An extraprostatic extension was seen in 42.8 % of specimens. The overall rate of positive margins was 30.7 % of specimens. In our cohort, after a mean follow-up of 19 months, 8.7 % of PSA failure has been reported. The rate of continence was 77.4 % at 6 months and 96.8 % at 2 years. The rate of potency was 17 % at 3 months and 60.9 % at 2 years. The 2-year rate was 86.7 % in case of intrafascial dissection. A trifecta outcome was achieved in 44 and 53 % of men at 12 and 24 months, respectively.

Conclusions

The extraperitoneal approach confers interesting results in terms of perioperative parameters as previously described in series using a transperitoneal approach. Functional outcomes in terms of continence and potency recovery after extraperitoneal seem equivalent to those reported after transperitoneal RALRP. Longer follow-up is warranted to confirm our favorable mid-term oncologic outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Schuessler WW, Schulam PG, Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR (1997) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short-term experience. Urology 50:854–857

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Guillonneau B, Vallancien G (2000) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris experience. J Urol 163:418–422

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Stolzenburg JU, Rabenalt R, DO M, Ho K, Dorschner W, Waldkirch E, Jonas U, Schütz A, Horn L, Truss MC (2005) Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy: oncological and functional results after 700 procedures. J Urol 174:1271–1275

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rassweiler J, Hruza M, Teber D, Su LM (2006) Laparoscopic and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy–critical analysis of the results. Eur Urol 49:612–624

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Salomon L, Levrel O, de la Taille A, Anastasiadis AG, Saint F, Zaki S et al (2002) Radical prostatectomy by the retropubic, perineal and laparoscopic approach: 12 years of experience in one center. Eur Urol 42:104–110

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Guillonneau B, El-fettouh H, Baumert H, Cathelineau X, Doublet JD, Fromont G, Vallancien G (2003) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncologic evaluation after 1,000 cases at Montsouris Institute. J Urol 169:1261

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Rassweiler J, Schulze M, Teber D, Marrero R, Seemann O, Rumpelt J, Frede T (2005) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with the Heilbronn technique: oncologic results in the first 500 patients. J Urol 173:761

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ficarra V, Novara G, Artibani W, Cestari A, Galfano A, Graefen M, Guazzoni G, Guillonneau B, Menon M, Montorsi F, Patel V, Rassweiler J, Van Poppel H (2009) Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol 55:1037–1063

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ficarra V, Novara G, Ahlering TE, Costello A, Eastham JA, Graefen M, Guazzoni G, Menon M, Mottrie A, Patel VR, Van der Poel H, Rosen RC, Tewari AK, Wilson TG, Zattoni F, Montorsi F (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62:418–430

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ficarra V, Novara G, Rosen RC, Artibani W, Carroll PR, Costello A, Menon M, Montorsi F, Patel VR, Stolzenburg JU, Van der Poel H, Wilson TG, Zattoni F, Mottrie A (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62:405–417

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ploussard G, Xylinas E, Salomon L, Vordos D, Hoznek A, Abbou CC, De La Taille A (2010) Robot-assisted extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: experience in a high-volume laparoscopy reference centre. BJU Int 105:1155–1160

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gettman MT, Hoznek A, Salomon L et al (2003) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of the extraperitoneal approach using the da Vinci robotic system. J Urol 170:416–419

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Xylinas E, Ploussard G, Salomon L et al (2010) Intrafascial nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy with a laparoscopic robot-assisted extraperitoneal approach: early oncological and functional results. J Endourol 24:577–582

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6,336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Xylinas E, Durand X, Ploussard G, et al (2011) Evaluation of combined oncologic and functional outcomes after robotic-assisted laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy: trifecta rate of achieving continence, potency and cancer control. Urol Oncol (in press)

  16. Jaffe J, Castellucci S, Cathelineau X, Harmon J, Rozet F, Barret E et al (2009) Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a single-institutions learning curve. Urology 73:127–133

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Badani KK, Kaul S, Menon M (2007) Evolution of robotic radical prostatectomy: assessment after 2,766 procedures. Cancer 110:1951–1958

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zorn KC, Orvieto MA, Gong EM, Mikhail AA, Gofrit ON, Zagaja GP et al (2007) Robotic radical prostatectomy learning curve of a fellowship-trained laparoscopic surgeon. J Endourol 21:441–447

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Tewari A, Sooriakumaran P, Bloch DA, Seshadri-Kreaden U, Hebert AE, Wiklund P (2012) Positive surgical margin and perioperative complication rates of primary surgical treatments for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing retropubic, laparoscopic, and robotic prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62:1–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rozet F, Jaffe J, Braud G et al (2007) A direct comparison of robotic assisted versus pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a single institution experience. J Urol 178:478–482

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Stolzenburg JU, Rabenalt R, Do M, Truss MC, Burchardt M, Herrmann TR, Schwalenberg T, Kallidonis P, Liatsikos EN (2007) Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy: the University of Leipzig experience of 1,300 cases. World J Urol 25:45–51

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Paul A, Ploussard G, Nicolaiew N, Xylinas E, Gillion N, de la Taille A, Vordos D, Hoznek A, Yiou R, Abbou CC, Salomon L (2010) Oncologic outcome after extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: midterm follow-up of 1,115 procedures. Eur Urol 57:267–272

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Novara G, Ficarra V, Mocellin S, Ahlering TE, Carroll PR, Graefen M, Guazzoni G, Menon M, Patel VR, Shariat SF, Tewari AK, Van Poppel H, Zattoni F, Montorsi F, Mottrie A, Rosen RC, Wilson TG (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting oncologic outcome after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62:382–404

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rocco B, Cozzi G, Spinelli MG, Coelho RF, Patel VR, Tewari A, Wiklund P, Graefen M, Mottrie A, Gaboardi F, Gill IS, Montorsi F, Artibani W, Rocco F (2012) Posterior musculofascial reconstruction after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 62(5):779–790

    Google Scholar 

  25. Park JW, Won Lee H, Kim W, Jeong BC, Jeon SS, Lee HM, Choi HY, Seo SI (2011) Comparative assessment of a single surgeon’s series of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: conventional versus robot-assisted. J Endourol 25:597–602

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hakimi AA, Blitstein J, Feder M, Shapiro E, Ghavamian R (2009) Direct comparison of surgical and functional outcomes of robotic-assisted versus pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: single-surgeon experience. Urology 73:119–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ahlering TE, Rodriguez E, Skarecky DW (2008) Overcoming obstacles: nerve-sparing issues in radical prostatectomy. J Endourol 22:745–750

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mullins JK, Hyndman ME, Mettee LZ, Pavlovich CP (2011) Comparison of extraperitoneal and transperitoneal pelvic lymph node dissection during minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. J Endourol 25:1883–1887

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guillaume Ploussard.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ploussard, G., Salomon, L., Parier, B. et al. Extraperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a single-center experience beyond the learning curve. World J Urol 31, 447–453 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-012-1014-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-012-1014-y

Keywords

Navigation