Role of robotics for prostate cancer

Current Opinion in Urology

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 65-68

  McCullough, T Casey ^a   Barret, Eric ^a   Cathelineau, Xavier ^a   Rozet, Francois ^a   Galiano, Marc ^a   Vallancien, Guy ^a  

^a INSTITUT MUTUALISTE MONTSOURIS   (France)

Author keywords

Da vinci prostatectomy; Prostate cancer; Robotic; Robotic prostatectomy

Indexed keywords

CANCER SURVIVAL; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; REVIEW; ROBOTICS; SEXUAL FUNCTION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

HUMANS; LAPAROSCOPY; MALE; PROSTATE; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; ROBOTICS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 58149218323     PISSN: 09630643     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e32831aedcf     Document Type: Review

References (23)

1. Guillonneau B, Vallancien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris technique. J Urol 2000; 163:1643-1649.
2. Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A, et al. Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes. J Urol 2002; 168:945-949.
3. Shrivastava A, Baliga M, Menon M. The Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy. BJU Int 2007; 99:1173-1189. The above study describes in detail the updated robotic VIP technique with excellent illustrations.
4. Tewari A, Jhaveri J, Rao S, et al. Total reconstruction of the vesico-urethral junction. BJU Int 2008; 101:871-877. The above study describes a novel technique of vesico-urethral reconstruction with good short-term results.
5. Moinzadeh A, Shunaigat AN, Libertino JA. Urinary incontinence after radical retropubic prostatectomy: the outcome of a surgical technique. BJU Int 2003; 92:355-359.
6. Rocco B, Gregori A, Stener S, et al. Posterior reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter allows a rapid recovery of continence after transperitoneal video-laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2007; 51:996-1003. The above study provides a good pictorial description of posterior reconstruction.
7. Rocco F, Carmignani L, Acquati P, et al. Restoration of posterior aspect of rhabdosphincter shortens continence time after radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 2006; 175:2201-2206.
8. 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. The above study provides additional supporting evidence that restoration of normal anatomic relationships contributes to early postoperative continence rates.
9. Menon M, Muhletaler F, Campos M, et al. Assessment of early continence after reconstruction of the periprostatic tissues in patients undergoing computer-assisted (robotic) prostatectomy: results of a 2 group parallel randomized controlled trial. J Urol 2008; 180:1018-1023. The only randomized controlled trial comparing single-layer to double-layer vesico-urethral anastomosis.
10. Jenkins LC, Nogueira M, Wilding GE, et al. Median lobe in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: evaluation and management. Urology 2008; 71:810-813. The first article to evaluate the effects of an enlarged median lobe during RALP.
11. Frota R, Tuma B, Santos BM, et al. The effect of prostate weight on the outcomes of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2007; 101:589-593. The above study examines key oncologic and functional outcomes in patients with large prostates.
12. Boczko J, Erturk E, Golijanin D, et al. Impact of prostate size in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Endourol 2007; 21:184-188. The first report on outcomes after extraperitoneal RALP, based on prostate size.
13. Zorn KC, Orvieto MA, Mikhail AA, et al. Effect of prostate weight on operative and postoperative outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Urology 2007; 69:300-305. A comprehensive review of the effect of prostate size on RALP.
14. Menon M, Tewari A, Peabody J, et al. Vattikuti Institut Prostatectomy, a technique of robotic radical prostatectomy for management of localized carcinoma of the prostate: experience of over 1100 cases. Urol Clin N Am 2004; 31:701-717.
15. Rozet F, Galiano M, Cathelineau X, et al. Extraperitoneal laparascopic radical prostatectomy: a prospective evaluation of 600 cases. J Urol 2005; 174:908-911.
16. Boczko J, Erturk E, Joseph J. Is there a proper pelvic size for extraperitoneal robot-assisted radical prostatectomy? J Endourol 2007; 21:1353-1356. The first study to examine pelvic size as a confounding factor for extraperitoneal RALP.
17. Atug F, Castle EP, Woods M, et al. Transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: is one better than the other? Urology 2006; 68:1077-1081.
18. Madi R, Daignault S, Wood DP. Extraperitoneal ν intraperitoneal robotic prostatectomy: analysis of operative outcomes. J Endourol 2007; 21:1553-1557. A comparison of extraperitoneal against intraperitoneal robotic prostatectomy in terms of operative time, margin status, pathologic grade, and complications.
19. Ahlering TE, Skarecky D, Lee D, dayman RV. Successful transfer of open surgical skills to a laparoscopic environment using a robotic interface: initial experience with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2003; 170:1738-1741.
20. Zom KC, Orvieto MA, Gong EM, et al. Robotic radical prostatectomy learning curve of a fellowship-trained laparoscopic surgeon. J Endourol 2007; 21:441-447. The first article to compare the robotic learning curve of a fellowship-trained laparoscopic surgeon to a laparoscopically naïve surgeon.
21. Herrell SD, Smith JA. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: what is the learning curve? Urology 2005; 66:105-107.
22. Berryhill R, Jhaveri J, Yadav R, et al. Robotic prostatectomy: a review of outcomes compared with laparoscopic and open approaches. Urology 2008; 72:15-23. An excellent review with comprehensive tables comparing operative and post-operative outcomes among RALP, LRP, and ORP.
23. Badani KK, Kaul S, Menon M. Evolution of robotic radical prostatectomy: assessment after 2766 procedures. Cancer 2007; 110:1951-1958. The above study provides insight into the largest published data on robotic prostatectomy over a 5-year period.