Journal List > J Korean Med Assoc > v.47(5) > 1080385

Hong: Radical Prostatectomy

Abstract

Radical prostatectomy is mainly performed for the treatment of localized prostate cancer thanks to the early diagnosis using diagnostic tools, such as digital rectal examination, prostate specific antigen (PSA), transrectal ultrasonography and prostate biopsy. Retropubic approach or perineal approach can be used for open radical prostatectomy. Recently laparoscopic radical prostatectomy has become an acceptable alternative to open surgery. Indications for radical prostatectomy, the advantages and disadvantages of the each method, results of operation, complications and postoperative follow up will be described in this article.

Figures and Tables

Table 1
jkma-47-417-i001

Frazier HA, Robertson JE, Paulson DF. Radical prostatectomy : The pros and cons of the perineal vs. retropubic approach. J Urol 1992 ; 147 : 888 - 90

Table 2
jkma-47-417-i002

Frazier HA, Robertson JE, Paulson DF. Radical prostatectomy : The pros and cons of the perineal vs. retropubic approach. J Urol 1992 ; 147 : 888 - 90

Table 3
jkma-47-417-i003

-not available ; a Results at 1 year ; b Results at 4 years ; c 24% of pT3 with adjuvant antiandrogen therapy

Rassweiler J, Schulze M, Teber D, Seeman O, Frede T. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy : functional and oncological outcomes. Curr Opin Urol 2004 ; 14 : 75 - 82

References

1. Eastham JA, Scardino PT. Vogelzang NJ, Scardino PT, Shipley WU, Coffey DS, editors. Radical prostatectomy for clinical stage T1 and T2 prostate cancer. Comprehensive textbook of genitourinary oncology. 1996. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins;741–758.
2. Walsh PC. Radical retropubic prostatectomy with reduced morbidity. An anatomic approach. Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1988. 7:133.
3. Blute ML, Bostwick DG, Bergstralh EJ, Slazak JM, Martin SK, Zincke H, et al. Anatomic site-specific positive margins in organ-confined prostate cancer and its impact on outcome after radical prostatectomy. Urology. 1997. 50:733–739.
crossref
4. Paulson DF. Lepor H, Lawson RK, editors. Radical perineal prostatectomy. Prostate diseases. 1993. Philadelphia: WB Saunders;315–325.
5. Wolf JS, Andriole GL. The selection of patients for cross-sectional imaging and pelvic lymphadenectomy before radical prostatectomy. AUA Update Series. 1997. 16:114–119.
6. Frazier HA, Robertson JE, Paulson DF. Radical prostatectomy: The pros and cons of the perineal vs. retropubic approach. J Urol. 1992. 147:888–890.
crossref
7. Kibel AS, Creager MA, Goldhaber SZ, Richie JP, Loughlin KR. Late venous thromboembolic disease after radical prostatectomy: effect of risk factors, warfarin and early discharge. J Urol. 1997. 158:2211–2215.
crossref
8. Shelfo SW, Obek C, Soloway MS. Update on bladder neck preservation during radical retropubic prostatectomy: impact on pathologic outcome, anastomotic strictures, and continence. Urology. 1998. 51:73–78.
crossref
9. Schuessler WW, Schulam PG, Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short-term experience. Urology. 1997. 50:854–857.
crossref
10. Guillonneau B, Vallancien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial experience and preliminary assessment after 65 operations. Prostate. 1999. 39:71–75.
crossref
11. Abbou CC, Salomon L, Hoznek A, Antiphon P, Cicco A, Saint F, et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: preliminary results. Urology. 2000. 50:630–634.
crossref
12. Gettman MT, Oznek A, Salomon L, Katz R, Borkowski T, Antiphon P, et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of the extraperitoneal approach using the da Vinci robotic system. J Urol. 2003. 170:416–419.
crossref
13. Guillonneau B, Vallancien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris experience. J Urol. 2000. 163:418–412.
crossref
14. Andriole GL, Smith DS, Rao G, Goodnough L, Catalona WJ. Early complications of contemporary anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol. 1994. 152:1858–1860.
crossref
15. Guillonneau B, Hazem F, Cathelineau H, Bermudaz X, Doublet H, Fromont J, et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Oncological mid-term evaluation about 1000 patients at Montsouris institute. J Endourol. 2002. 16:Suppl. A36.
16. Guillonneau B, Cathelineau X, Doublet J, Baumert H, Vallancien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: assessment after 550 procedures. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2002. 43:123–133.
crossref
17. Guillonneau B, Cathelineau X, Barret E, Dell'oro A, Vallancien G. Short term functional results of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Statement after 100 first procedures. J Endourol. 1999. 13:95.
18. Ken N, Masaru M. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The 19th Japan-Korea urological congress. 2002. Fukuoka, Japan: –77.
19. Rassweiler J, Schulze M, Teber D, Seeman O, Frede T. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: functional and oncological outcomes. Curr Opin Urol. 2004. 14:75–82.
crossref
20. Cookson MS, Fair WR. Neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy and radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. AUA Update Series. 1997. 16:98–103.
TOOLS
Similar articles