4.4 Article

Laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy - Learning curve of a laparoscopy-naive urologist in a community hospital

期刊

UROLOGY
卷 65, 期 5, 页码 959-963

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2004.11.019

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives. To describe the training approach that a laparoscopy-naive general urologist working in a nonteaching hospital used to successfully learn to perform laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy and describe the results obtained in the first 1 14 cases performed. Methods. The urologist assisted an experienced laparoscopic surgeon for 20 extraperitoneal radical prostatectomies. During this time, he modified his technique of performing open radical retropubic prostatectomy to facilitate the acquisition of the laparoscopic techniques. Intracorporeal suturing was learned with the aid of a pelvic trainer. The clinical records of the first consecutive 114 cases were examined to evaluate the outcomes in terms of morbidity and oncological and functional concerns. A similar analysis was performed on a subgroup of 15 patients who had undergone laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy after previous transurethral resection of the prostate. Results. The operating time progressively decreased during the learning curve. The mean duration of surgery was 160 minutes. Two conversions to open surgery were required owing to failure to progress. Of the 1 14 patients, 14% experienced complications, most of which were minor. The positive surgical margin rate was 17%. The average follow-up was 16 months. Undetectable serum prostate-specific antigen levels were observed in 82%, 87%, and 79% at 6, 12, and 18 months, respectively; 96% of patients used 0 to I pad per day for incontinence at 6 months of follow-up. The results in the transurethral resection subgroup were similar. Conclusions. Laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy can be successfully learned by a general urologist with no prior laparoscopic experience. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据