Abstract
Prostate cancer (CaP) is one of the most common cancers worldwide. It is estimated that more than two million men are currently living with prostate cancer within the European Union.1 In the USA, data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registry indicates that every year younger and healthier men are being diagnosed with localized prostate cancer2 with an annual percent increase estimated at 9.5%. Though a number of treatment options are available for this group population, radical prostatectomy (RP) remains the gold-standard approach offering the best chances of long-term cure. This patient population poses an even more challenging scenario for the urologic oncologist, as younger patients will commonly have higher expectations from any given treatment option, seeking for optimal cancer control without impairing postoperative functional outcomes such as continence and potency.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ferlay J, Autier P, Boniol M, Heanue M, Colombet M, Boyle P. Estimates of the cancer incidence and mortality in Europe in 2006. Ann Oncol. 2007;18(3):581-592.
Stephenson RA. Prostate cancer trends in the era of prostate-specific antigen. An update of incidence, mortality, and clinical factors from the SEER database. Urol Clin North Am. 2002;29:173-181.
Young HH. Conservative perineal prostatectomy: the results of two years’ experience and report of seventy-five cases. Ann Surg. 1905;41(4):549-557.
Walsh PC, Donker PJ. Impotence following radical prostatectomy: insight into etiology and prevention. J Urol. 1982;128:492-497.
Ahlering TE, Rodriguez E, Skarecky DW. Overcoming obstacles: nerve-sparing issues in radical prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2008;22(4):745-750.
Orvieto MA, Patel VR. Evolution of robot-assisted radical prostatecomy. Scand J Surg. 2009;98(2):76-88.
Finley DS, Rodriguez E Jr, Skarecky DW, Ahlering TE. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the recovery of potency after radical prostatectomy: effect of unilateral vs bilateral nerve sparing. BJU Int. 2009;104(10):1484-1489.
Chien GW, Mikhail AA, Orvieto MA, et al. Modified clipless antegrade nerve preservation in robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with validated sexual function evaluation. Urology. 2005;66(2):419-423.
Finley DS, Osann K, Skarecky D, Ahlering TE. Hypothermic nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: rationale, feasibility, and effect on early continence. Urology. 2009;73(4):691-696.
Chuang MS, O’Connor RC, Laven BA, Orvieto MA, Brendler CB. Early release of the neurovascular bundles and optical loupe magnification lead to improved and earlier return of potency following radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol. 2005;173(2):537-539.
Magera JS Jr, Inman BA, Slezak JM, Bagniewski SM, Sebo TJ, Myers RP. Increased optical magnification from 2.5× to 4.3× with technical modification lowers the positive margin rate in open radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol. 2008;179(1):130-135.
Tewari A, Srivasatava A, Menon M, Members of the VIP Team. A prospective comparison of radical retropubic and robot-assisted prostatectomy: experience in one institution. BJU Int. 2003;92(3):205-210.
Krambeck AE, DiMarco DS, Rangel LJ, et al. Radical prostatectomy for prostatic adenocarcinoma: a matched comparison of open retropubic and robot-assisted techniques. BJU Int. 2009;103(4):448-453.
Binder J, Kramer W. Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2001;87(4):408-410.
Lepor H, Gregerman M, Crosby R, Mostofi FK, Walsh PC. Precise localization of the autonomic nerves from the pelvic plexus to the corpora cavernosa: a detailed anatomical study of the adult male pelvis. J Urol. 1985;133(2):207-212.
Quinlan DM, Epstein JI, Carter BS, Walsh PC. Sexual function following radical prostatectomy: influence of preservation of neurovascular bundles. J Urol. 1991;145(5):998-1002.
Costello AJ, Brooks M, Cole OJ. Anatomical studies of the neurovascular bundle and cavernosal nerves. BJU Int. 2004;94(7):1071-1076.
Tewari A, Takenaka A, Mtui E, et al. The proximal neurovascular plate and the tri-zonal neural architecture around the prostate gland: importance in the athermal robotic technique of nerve-sparing prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2006;98(2):314-323.
Martïnez-Piňeiro L, Cansino JR, Sanchez C, Tabernero A, Cisneros J, de la Peňa JJ. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Differences between interfascial and intrafascial technique. Eur Urol. 2006;5(suppl):331.
Stolzenburg JU, Schwalenberg T, Horn LC, Neuhaus J, Constantinides C, Liatsikos EN. Anatomical landmarks of radical prostatecomy. Eur Urol. 2007;51(3):629-639.
Kiyoshima K, Yokomizo A, Yoshida T, et al. Anatomical features of periprostatic tissue and its surroundings: a histological analysis of 79 radical retropubic prostatectomy specimens. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2004;34(8):463-468.
Villers A, Stamey TA, Yemoto C, Rischmann P, McNeal JE. Modified extrafascial radical retropublic prostatectomy technique decreases frequency of positive surgical margins in T2 cancers<2 cm(3). Eur Urol. 2000;38(1):64-73.
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(3):755-762.
Stolzenburg JU, Kallidonis P, Do M, et al. A comparison of outcomes for interfascial and intrafascial nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2010;76(3):743-748.
Orvieto MA, Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Mathe M, Palmer K, Patel VR. Erectile dysfunction after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2010;10(5):747-754.
Chauhan S, Coelho RF, Rocco B, Palmer KJ, Orvieto MA, Patel VR. Techniques of nerve-sparing and potency outcomes following robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Int Braz J Urol. 2010;36(3):259-272.
Patel VR, Coelho RF, Chauhan S, et al. Continence, potency and oncological outcomes after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: early trifecta results of a high-volume surgeon. BJU Int. 2010;106(5):696-702.
Van der Poel HG, de Blok W, Joshi N, van Muilekom E. Preservation of lateral prostatic fascia is associated with urine continence after robotic-assisted prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2009;55(4):892-900.
Zorn KC, Gofrit ON, Steinberg GP, et al. Planned nerve preservation to reduce positive surgical margins during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2008;22:1303-1309.
Ong AM, Su LM, Varkarakis I, et al. Nerve sparing radical prostatectomy: effects of hemostatic energy sources on the recovery of cavernous nerve function in a canine model. J Urol. 2004;172:1318-1322.
Ahlering TE, Eichel L, Chou D, Skarecky DW. Feasibility study for robotic radical prostatectomy cautery-free neurovascular bundle preservation. Urology. 2005;65(5):994-997.
Rodriguez E Jr, Finley DS, Skarecky D, Ahlering TE. Single institution 2-year patient reported validated sexual function outcomes after nerve sparing robot assisted radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2009;181(1):259-263.
Gill IS, Ukimura O, Rubinstein M, et al. Lateral pedicle control during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: refined technique. Urology. 2005;65(1):23-27.
Gianduzzo TR, Colombo JR Jr, Haber GP, et al. KTP laser nerve sparing radical prostatectomy: comparison of ultrasonic and cold scissor dissection on cavernous nerve function. J Urol. 2009;181:2760-2766.
Patel VR, Shah K, Palmer KJ, Thaly R, Coughlin G. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a report of the current state. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2007;7:1269-1278.
Orvieto MA, Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Orvieto MA, Palmer KJ, Patel VR. Early retrograde release of the neurovascular bundles during robotic assisted radical prostatectomy improves early return of potency. J Endourol. (In press)
Kaul S, Bhandari A, Hemal A, Savera A, Shrivastava A, Menon M. Robotic radical prostatectomy with preservation of the prostatic fascia: a feasibility study. Urology. 2005;66:1261-1265.
Menon M, Tewari A, Peabody J. VIP Team: Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: technique. J Urol. 2003;169:2289-2292.
Menon M, Shrivastava A, Kaul S, et al. Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: contemporary technique and analysis of results. Eur Urol. 2007;51:648-657; discussion 657-658.
Menon M, Shrivastava A, Bhandari M, Satyanarayana R, Siva S, Agarwal PK. Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: technical modifications in 2009. Eur Urol. 2009;56:89-96.
Guru KA, Perlmutter AE, Butt ZM, Peabody JO. Hydrodissection for preservation of neurovascular bundle during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Can J Urol. 2008;15:4000-4003.
Rocco B, Matei DV, Melegari S, et al. Robotic vs open prostatectomy in a laparoscopically naive centre: a matched-pair analysis. BJU Int. 2009;104(7):991-995.
Hakimi AA, Blitstein J, Feder M, Shapiro E, Ghavamian R. Direct comparison of surgical and functional outcomes of robotic-assisted versus pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: single-surgeon experience. Urology. 2009;73(1):119-123.
Bentas W, Wolfram M, Jones J, Bräutigam R, Kramer W, Binder J. Robotic technology and the translation of open radical prostatectomy to laparoscopy: the early Frankfurt experience with robotic radical prostatectomy and one year follow-up. Eur Urol. 2003;44(2):175-181.
Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Palmer KJ, Rocco B, Patel M, Patel VR. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. A review of current outcomes. BJU Int. 2009;104(10):1428-1435.
Mendiola FP, Zorn KC, Mikhail AA, et al. Urinary and sexual function outcomes among different age groups after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2008;22(3):519-524.
Ahlering TE, Kaplan AG, Yee DS, Skarecky DW. Prostate weight and early potency in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2008;72(6):1263-1268.
Madeb R, Golijanin D, Knopf J, et al. Patient-reported validated functional outcome after extraperitoneal robotic-assisted nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. JSLS. 2007;11(4):443-448.
Van der Poel HG, de Blok W. Role of extent of fascia preservation and erectile function after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Urology. 2009;73(4):816-821.
Murphy DG, Kerger M, Crowe H, Peters JS, Costello AJ. Operative details and oncological and functional outcome of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: 400 cases with a minimum of 12 months follow-up. Eur Urol. 2009;55(6):1367.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag London Limited
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Orvieto, M.A., Patel, V.R. (2011). Improving Outcomes for Early Return of Potency. In: Patel, V. (eds) Robotic Urologic Surgery. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-800-1_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-800-1_18
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-84882-799-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-84882-800-1
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)