Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Difficulties in Robotic-Assisted Nerve-Sparing Radical Prostatectomy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Difficult Conditions in Laparoscopic Urologic Surgery

  • 634 Accesses

Abstract

Serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening, coupled with a rising incidence of needle biopsies in asymptomatic men, have all contributed to prostate cancer becoming the most common cancer in men in the United States1,2 and other parts of the world.3 With increasing evidence of improved long-term survival and progression-free outcomes,4–7 radical prostatectomy has become increasingly popular as the treatment of first choice for organ-confined disease.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Penson DF, Rossignol M, Sartor AO, Scardino PT, Abenhaim LL. Prostate cancer: epidemiology and health-related quality of life. Urology. 2008;72(Suppl 6A):3-11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics, 2008. CA Cancer J Clin. 2008;58:71-96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Quinn M, Babb P. Patterns and trends in prostate cancer incidence, survival, prevalence and mortality. Part 1: International comparisons. BJU Int. 2002;90(2):162-173.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lu-Yao GL, Yao S. Population based study of long-term survival in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Lancet. 1997;349:906-910.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. D’Amico DV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 1998;280(11):969-974.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(19):1977-1984.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Filen F, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in localized prostate cancer: the Scandinavian prostate cancer group-4 randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100(16):1144-1154.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Su L. Role of robotics in modern urologic practice. Curr Opin Urol. 2009;19:63-64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Begg CB, Riedel ER, Bach PB, et al. Variations in morbidity after radical prostatectomy. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(15):1138-1144.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bianco FJ Jr, Reidel ER, Begg CB, Kattan MW, Scardino PT. Variations among high volume surgeons in the rate of complications after radical prostatectomy: further evidence that technique matters. J Urol. 2005;173:2099-2113.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wilt TJ, Shamliyan TA, Taylor BC, MacDonald R, Kane RL. Association between hospital and surgeon radical prostatectomy volume and patient outcomes: a systematic review. J Urol. 2008;180:820-829.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Berryhill R Jr, Jhaveri J, Yadav R, et al. Robotic prostatectomy: a review of outcomes compared with laparoscopic and open approaches. Urology. 2008;72:15-23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ficarra V, Novara G, Artibani W, et al. Retropubic, laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol. 2009;55(5):1037-1063.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fischer B, Engel N, Fehr J-L, John H. Complications of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. World J Urol. 2008;26:595-602.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hu JC, Nelson RA, Wilson TG, et al. Perioperative complications of laparoscopic and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2006;175:541-546.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Yee DS, Ornstein DK. Repair of rectal injury during robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Urology. 2008;72:428-431.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Guillonneau B, Rozet F, Cathelineau X, et al. Perioperative complications of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris 3-year experience. J Urol. 2002;167:51-56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bishoff JT, Allaf ME, Kirkels WIM, Moore RG, Kavoussi LR, Schroder F. Laparoscopic bowel injury: incidence and clinical presentation. J Urol. 1999;161:887-890.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Guillonneau B, Gupta R, El Fettouh H, Cathelineau X, Baumert H, Vallancien G. Laparoscopic management of rectal injury during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2003;169:1694-1696.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Shekarriz B, Upadhyay J, Wood DP. Intraoperative, perioperative and long term complications of radical prostatectomy. Urol Clin North Am. 2001;28:639-653.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Stolzenburg JU, Rabenault R, Do M, et al. Complications of endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE): prevention and management. World J Urol. 2006;24:668-675.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Spaliviero M, Stenberg AP, Kaouk JH, Desai MM, Hammert WC, Gill IS. Laparoscopic injury and repair of obdurator nerve during radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2004;64:1030.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sarle R, Tewari A, Hemal AK, Menon M. Robotic–assisted anatomic radical prostatectomy: technical difficulties due to a large median lobe. Urol Int. 2005;74:92-94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Meeks JJ, Zhao L, Greco KA, Macejko A, Nadler RB. Impact of prostate median lobe anatomy on robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Urology. 2009;73:323-327.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Rehman J, Chughtai B, Guru K, Shabsigh R, Samadi DB. Management of an enlarged median lobe with ureteral orifices at the margin of bladder neck during robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Can J Urol. 2009;16:4490-4494.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Katz MH, Eng MK, Deklaj T, Zorn KC. Technique for ureteral stent placement during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: safety measure during vesicourethral anastomosis when ureteral orifices are too close for comfort. J Endourol. 2009;23:827-829.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. El Douaihy Y, Tan GY, Dorsey PJ Jr, Patel ND, Jhaveri JK, Tewari AK. Double pig-tail stenting of the ureters: technique for securing the ureteral orifices during robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for large median lobes. J Endourol. 2009;23(12):1975-1977.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Borden LS Jr, Kozlowski PM, Porter CR, Corman JM. Mechanical failure rate of da Vinci robotic system. Can J Urol. 2007;14:3499-3501.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Zorn KC, Gofrit ON, Orvieto MA, et al. Da Vinci robot error and failure rates: single institution experience on a single three-arm robot unit of more than 700 consecutive robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomies. J Endourol. 2007;21:1341-1345.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Lavery HJ, Thaley R, Albala D, et al. Robotic equipment malfunction during robotic prostatectomy: a multi-institutional study. J Endourol. 2008;22:2165-2168.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Magee CC, Pascual M. Update in renal transplantation. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:1373-1388.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Campagnari J, Ribeiro L, Mangini M, et al. Localized prostate cancer in patients submitted to renal transplant. Int Braz J Urol. 2002;28:330-334.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Marcen R, Pascual J, Tato JL, et al. Renal transplant outcome after losing the first graft. Transplant Proc. 2003;35:1679-1681.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Jhaveri JK, Tan GY, Scherr DS, Tewari AK. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in the renal allograft transplant recipient. J Endourol. 2008;22:2475-2479.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Thomas AA, Nguyen MM, Gill IS. Laparoscopic transperitoneal radical prostatectomy in renal transplant recipients: a review of three cases. Urology. 2008;71:205-208.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Eastham JA, Kattan MW, Rogers E, et al. Risk factors for urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 1996;156:1707-1713.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Sacco E, Prayer-Galetti T, Pinto F. Urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy: incidence by definition, risk factors and temporal trend in a large series with a long-term follow-up. BJU Int. 2006;97(6):1234-1241.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Park R, Martin S, Goldberg JD, Lepor H. Anastomotic strictures following radical prostatectomy: insights into incidence, effectiveness of intervention, effect on continence, and factors predisposing to occurrence. Urology. 2001;57:742-746.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Patil N, Krane L, Javed K, Williams T, Bhandari M, Menon M. Evaluating and grading cystographic leakage: correlation with clinical outcomes in patients undergoing robotic prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2009;103:1108-1110.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Gnanapragasam VJ, Baker P, Naisby GP, Chadwick D. Identification and validation of risk factors for vesicourethral leaks following radical retropubic prostatectomy. Int J Urol. 2008;12:948-952.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Ramsden AR, Chodak GW. Can leakage at the vesico-urethral anastomosis be predicted after radical retropubic prostatectomy? BJU Int. 2004;93:504-506.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Leibovitch I, Rowland RG, Little JS Jr, et al. Cystography after radical retropubic prostatectomy: clinical implications of abnormal findings. Urology. 1995;46:78-80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Berlin JW, Ramchandani P, Banner MP, et al. Voiding cystography after radical prostatectomy: normal findings and correlation between contrast extravasation and anastomotic strictures. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1994;162:87-91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Guru KA, Seereiter PJ, Sfakianos JP, Hutson AD, Mohler JL. Is a cystogram necessary after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy? Urol Oncol. 2007;25:465-467.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Tan GY, Jhaveri JK, Tewari AK. Anatomic restoration technique (ART): a biomechanics based approach to early continence recovery following minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2009;74(3):492-496.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Stolzenburg J-U, Wasserschied J, Rabenault R, et al. Reduction in incidence of lymphocele following extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection by bilateral peritoneal fenestration. World J Urol. 2008;26(6):581-586.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Shaher Z. Port closure techniques. Surg Endosc. 2007;21:1264-1274.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Brown JA, Elliott DS, Barrett DM. Postprostatectomy urinary incontinence: a comparison of the cost of conservative versus surgical management. Urology. 1998;51(5):715-720.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. van Randenborgh H, Paul R, Kubler H, Breul J, Hartung R. Improved urinary continence after radical retropubic prostatectomy with preparation of a long, partially intraprostatic portion of the membranous urethra: an analysis of 1013 consecutive cases. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2004;7:253-257.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Nyugen L, Jhaveri J, Tewari A. Surgical technique to overcome anatomical shortcoming: balancing post-prostatectomy continence outcomes of urethral sphincter lengths on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol. 2008;179:1907-1911.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Steiner MS. Continence-preserving anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology. 2000;55:427-435.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Montorsi F, Salonia A, Suardi N, et al. Improving the preservation of the urethral sphincter and neurovascular bundles during open radical retropubic prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2005;48:938-945.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Rocco F, Carmignani L, Aquati P, et al. Restoration of posterior aspect of rhabdosphincter shortens continence time after radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol. 2006;175:2201-2206.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Rocco B, Gregori A, Stener S, et al. Posterior reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter allows a rapid recovery of continence after transperitoneal videolaparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2007;51:996-1003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Nguyen MM, Kamoi K, Stein RJ, et al. Early continence outcomes of posterior musculofascial plate reconstruction during robotic and laparoscopic prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2008;101:1135-1139.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Licht MR, Klein EA, Tuason L, Levin H. Impact of bladder neck preservation during radical prostatectomy on continence and cancer control. Urology. 1994;44:883-887.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Cambio AJ, Evans CP. Minimising postoperative incontinence following radical prostatectomy: considerations and evidence. Eur Urol. 2006;50:903-913.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Walsh PC, Marschke PL. Intussusception of the bladder neck leads to earlier continence after radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2002;59(6):934-938.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Srougi M, Paranhos M, Leite KM, Dall’Oglio M, Nesrallah L. The influence of bladder neck mucosal eversion and early urinary extravasation on patient outcome after radical retropubic prostatectomy: a prospective controlled trial. BJU Int. 2005;95(6):757-760.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Stolzenburg JU, Liatsikos EN, Rabenalt R, et al. Nerve sparing endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy – effect of puboprostatic ligament preservation on early continence and positive margins. Eur Urol. 2006;49(1):103-111.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Tewari AK, Bigelow K, Rao S, et al. Anatomic restoration technique of continence mechanism and preservation of puboprostatic collar: a novel modification to achieve early urinary continence in men undergoing robotic prostatectomy. Urology. 2007;69:726-731.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Mimic Technologies. dv Trainer brochure. Available at: http://www.mimic.ws/products/MIMIC-dV-Trainer-Brochure.pdf. Accessed July 30, 2009.

  63. Sweet RM, McDougall EM. Simulation and computer-animated devices: the new minimally invasive skills training paradigm. Urol Clin North Am. 2008;35:519-531.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Brown-Clerk B, Siu KC, Katsavelis D, Lee I, Oleynikov D, Stergiou N. Validating advanced robotic-assisted laparoscopic training task in virtual reality. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2008;132:45-49.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Tan GY, Goel RK, Kaouk JH, Tewari AK. Technological advances in robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery. Urol Clin North Am. 2009;36:237-249.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Jalan Tan Tock Seng, Singapore

    Gerald Y. Tan MB,ChB,MRCS,M Med,FAMS,FICS

  2. Department of Urology, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA

    Philip J. Dorsey Jr. MD MPH

  3. Chairman of the Milton and Carroll Petrie Department of Urology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Department of Urology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA

    Ashutosh K. Tewari MD, MCh

Authors
  1. Gerald Y. Tan MB,ChB,MRCS,M Med,FAMS,FICS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Philip J. Dorsey Jr. MD MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ashutosh K. Tewari MD, MCh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ashutosh K. Tewari MD, MCh .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Kuwait University, Kuwait, Kuwait

    Ahmed Al-Kandari

  2. Department of Urology, Muljibhai Patel Urological Hospital, Nadiad, Gujarat, India

    Arvind P. Ganpule

  3. Urology Department, Faculty of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

    Raed A. Azhar

  4. USC Institute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Inderbir S. Gill

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Tan, G.Y., Dorsey, P.J., Tewari, A.K. (2018). Difficulties in Robotic-Assisted Nerve-Sparing Radical Prostatectomy. In: Al-Kandari, A., Ganpule, A., Azhar, R., Gill, I. (eds) Difficult Conditions in Laparoscopic Urologic Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52581-5_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52581-5_18

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-52580-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-52581-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation