Search

Objective: We compared the outcomes of robotic-assisted radical perineal prostatectomy (r-PRP) versus robotic-assisted transperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP). Material and methods: Between November 2016 and September 2017 in our center, 40 patients underwent r-PRP, and 40 patients underwent RARP. All patients also underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) to exclude the cases with locally advanced disease. Patients with localized prostate cancer (C-T2N0M0) were included in the study. The exclusion criteria were contraindications for undergoing robotic radical prostatectomy; the Gleason score ≥4+3; extracapsular extension proven on biopsy or suspected on mpMRI; clinical stage ≥T2c; required pelvic lymph dissection according to Partin's normogram; previous radiation therapy; hormonal therapy; any previous prostatic, urethral, or bladder neck surgery; and preoperative urinary incontinence or erectile dysfunction. Patients were placed in the exaggerated lithotomy position with 15° Trendelenburg for r-PRP and 40° Trendelenburg for RARP. Results: The mean age for the r-PRP and RARP groups were 61.2 (46-73) and 62.2 (50-75) years, respectively. The mean body mass index was significantly higher in the r-PRP group (p=0.02). The mean procedure duration time was 169.4 (100-255) minutes for the r-PRP group and 173.1 (130-210) minutes for the RARP group. The mean console time and anastomosis time were significantly lower for the r-PRP group. The mean estimated blood loss was significantly lower for the r-PRP group (p=0.002). Immediate continence rates in the r-PRP and RARP groups following the urethral catheter removal were 42% and 35% (p=0.30), respectively. Continence rates increased to 94.2% in the r-PRP and 72% in RARP (p=0.001) group at the 6th month, and to 95% in the r-PRP and 85.2% in RARP (p=0.02) group at the 9th month follow-up period. According to the International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5), the erectile function rates at the 3-, 6-, and 9-month follow-up in the r-PRP group were 44%, 66%, and 75%, respectively. The rates in the RARP group at the 3-, 6-, and 9-month follow-up were 25%, 42%, and 66% (p=0.001), respectively. Conclusion: In our experience, r-PRP has acceptable morbidity, excellent surgical and pathological outcomes, and satisfactory oncologic and functional results compared to RARP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To describe The Tugcu Bakirkoy robotic perineal radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection technique, and present the results of seven patients. Material and methods: We performed seven robotic perineal radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection operation using Da Vinci Xi HD Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, California, USA) on single Gel-port platform. The operation is completed in 4 stages: stage 1 open perineal dissection and gel port placement, stage 2 robotic perineal radical prostatectomy, stage 3 robotic pelvic lymph node dissection, stage 4 vesico-urethral anastomosis. In addition to describing the operation technique step by step, we aimed to present the perioperative and postoperative findings of the seven patients who underwent The Tugcu Bakirkoy Technique. Results: All operations were successfully completed without any complications in fully the robotic procedure by a single surgeon. Demographic data of the patients were as follows: Mean age (62.1-8 years), mean body mass index (28.2-0.7 kg/m²), mean prostate specific antigen value (10.7-3 ng/mL), and mean prostate volume (64.2±15.3 cc). Mean operative time (184.1±20.2 mins), blood loss (64.2±15.3 cc), hospitalization time (2.1±0.6 days), and time to withdrawal of the urethral catheter (7.8±0.8 days) were also estimated. According to the pathology results, lymph node metastasis was detected in 3 patients while the surgical margin was positive in one. Conclusion: We demonstrated for the first time that a new The Tugcu Bakirkoy robotic perineal radical prostatectomy technique which was previously tested in a cadaveric model, can be safely applied for the first time in vivo, and presented our results. On the basis of this, for problems that can not be overcome by traditional methods, this method is a good alternative as a way out. In this regard, it is necessary to carry out advanced studies so that this method can be applied to daily practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Posterior urethral strictures are difficult cases to treat for urologists. Anastomotic open urethroplasty is the major surgical treatment option, and various modifications/manipulations to the procedure have been recommended in the literature. We aimed to assess the advantages of performing antegrade endoscopy through the suprapubic cystostomy tract during perineal urethroplasty. Material and methods: Thirty-six perineal urethroplasties combined with suprapubic cystoscopy were performed in 33 adult male patients between 2005 and 2011. Pre-and peri-operative records of the patients were evaluated, with a particular focus on suprapubic cystoscopy findings during urethroplasty. Results: The mean patient age was 41 years, and the mean lesion length was 2.6 cm (range 1-10 cm). Lesions were secondary to pelvic trauma in 21 patients, to a history of prostatic surgery in 8 patients, and to other miscellaneous causes in the 4 remaining patients. In 23 cases with normal bladder necks, the anastomosis was created under the guidance of antegrade cystoscopy with fluoroscopy. In 10 cases, stiff guide wires or paddles were used in addition to endoscopic light to identify the correct anastomosis site. In two procedures, fistula openings were identified during endoscopy, and fistula repair was performed along with anastomosis. In one case involving the longest lesion with involvement of the bladder neck, a combined perineal-transpubic urethroplasty was performed. The mean follow up duration was 19 (3-38) months. The overall success rate was 91%, and the re-operation rate was 9%. Conclusion: Suprapubic cystoscopy is an easy-to-perform adjunctive modality in perineal urethroplasty. This method provides the benefits of supplementary endoscopic findings and feasibility of certain maneuvers that facilitate debridement and anastomosis formation concurrent with perineal urethroplasty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]