Sural nerve grafting in robotic laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Interim report

Journal of Endourology

Volumn 21, Issue 12, 2007, Pages 1547-1551

  Mikhail, Albert A ^a   Song, David H ^a   Zorn, Kevin C ^a   Orvieto, Marcelo A ^a   Taxy, Jerome B ^a   Lin, Shang P ^a   Mendiola, Frederick P ^a   Shalhav, Arieh L ^a   Zagaja, Gregory P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER SURGERY; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LEG PAIN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NERVE GRAFT; OPERATION DURATION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; ROBOTICS; SEXUAL FUNCTION; SURAL NERVE; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; URINARY TRACT FUNCTION;

ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; LAPAROSCOPY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; ROBOTICS; SURAL NERVE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 38049183253     PISSN: 08927790     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/end.2007.9870     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Weber RV, Mackinnon SE. Bridging the neural gap. Clin Plast Surg 2005;32:605-616.
2. Liu HM. Growth factors and extracellular matrix in peripheral nerve regeneration, studied with a nerve chamber. J Peripher Nerv Syst 1996;1:97-110.
3. Schmidt CE, Leach JB. Neural tissue engineering: Strategies for repair and regeneration. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2003;5:293-347.
4. Syme DB, Corcoran NM, Bouchier-Hayes DM, Costello AJ. Hope springs eternal: Cavernosal nerve regeneration. BJU Int. 2006;97:17-21.
5. Fields RD, Ellisman MH. Axons regenerated through silicone tube splices. I. Conduction properties. Exp Neurol 1986;92:48-60.
6. May F, Weidner N, Matiasek K, et al. Schwann cells seeded guidance tubes restore erectile function after ablation of cavernous nerves in rats. J Urol 2004;172:374-377.
7. Walsh PC, Donker PJ. Impotence following radical prostatectomy: Insight into etiology and prevention. J Urol 1982;128:492-497.
8. Kim ED, Scardino PT, Hampel O, Mills NL, Wheeler TM, Nath RK. Interposition of sural nerve restores function of cavernous nerves resected during radical prostatectomy. J Urol 1999;161:188-192.
9. Walsh, PC. Nerve grafts are rarely necessary and are unlikely to improve sexual function in men undergoing anatomic radical prostatectomy. Urology 2001;57:1020-1024.
10. Kim ED, Nath R, Slawin KM, Kadmon D, Miles BJ, Scardino PT. Bilateral nerve grafting during radical retropubic prostatectomy: Extended follow-up. Urology 2001;58:983-987.
11. Porpiglia F, Ragni F, Terrone C, et al. Is laparoscopic unilateral sural nerve grafting during radical prostatectomy effective in retaining sexual potency? BJU Int. 2005;95:1267-1271.
12. Kaouk JH, Desai MM, Abreu SC, Papay F, Gill IS. Robotic assisted laparoscopic sural nerve grafting during radical prostatectomy: Initial experience. J Urol 2003;170:909-912.
13. Chien GW, Mikhail AA, Orvieto MA, Zagaja GP, Sokoloff MH, Brendler CB, Shalhav AL. Modified clipless antegrade nerve preservation in robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with validated sexual function evaluation. Urology 2005;66:419-423.
14. Quinlan DM, Epstein JI, Carter BS, Walsh PC. Sexual function following radical prostatectomy: Influence of preservation of neurovascular bundles. J Urol 1991;145:998-1002.
15. Takenaka A, Murakami G, Soga H, Han S, Arai Y, Fujisawa M. Anatomical analysis of the neurovascular bundle supplying penile cavernous tissue to ensure a reliable nerve graft after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2004;172:1032-1035.