Surgery and Marketing: Comparing Different Methods of Radical Prostatectomy

European Urology

Volumn 55, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 1031-1033

  Wirth, Manfred P ^a   Hakenberg, Oliver W ^b  

^a DRESDEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ROSTOCK   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHOLECYSTECTOMY; COLON RESECTION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EDITORIAL; HOSPITALIZATION; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; MINIMALLY INVASIVE PROCEDURE; NEPHRECTOMY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATECTOMY; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE;

HUMANS; LAPAROSCOPY; MALE; MARKETING OF HEALTH SERVICES; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; PAIN, POSTOPERATIVE; PERIOPERATIVE CARE; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK ASSESSMENT; ROBOTICS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, MINIMALLY INVASIVE; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; UROLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES, MALE;

EID: 62649165860     PISSN: 03022838     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.02.013     Document Type: Editorial

References (14)

1. Ficarra V., Novara G., Artibani W., et al. Retropubic, laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol 55 (2009) 1037-1063
2. Miyake H., Kawabata G., Gotoh A., et al. Comparison of surgical stress between laparoscopy and open surgery in the field of urology by measurement of humoral mediators. Int J Urol 9 (2002) 329-333
3. Majeed A.W., Troy G., Nicholl J.P., et al. Randomised, prospective, single-blind comparison of laparoscopic versus small-incision cholecystectomy. Lancet 347 (1996) 989-994
4. Squirrell D.M., Majeed A.W., Troy G., Peacock J.E., Nicholl J.P., and Johnson A.G. A randomized, prospective, blinded comparison of postoperative pain, metabolic response, and perceived health after laparoscopic and small incision cholecystectomy. Surgery 123 (1998) 485-495
5. Touijer K., Eastham J.A., and Secin F.P. Comprehensive prospective comparative analysis of outcomes between open and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy conducted in 2003 to 2005. J Urol 179 (2008) 1811-1817
6. Rassweiler J., Seemann O., Schulze M., Teber D., Hatzinger M., and Frede T. Laparoscopic versus open radical prostatectomy: a comparative study at a single institution. J Urol 169 (2003) 1689-1693
7. Mattei A., Naspro R., Annino F., Burke D., Guida Jr. R., and Gaston R. Tension and energy-free robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with interfascial dissection of the neurovascular bundles. Eur Urol 52 (2007) 687-694
8. Carini M., Masieri L., Minervini A., Lapini A., and Serni S. Oncological and functional results of antegrade radical retropubic prostatectomy for the treatment of clinically localised prostate cancer. Eur Urol 53 (2008) 554-563
9. Hu J.C., Wang Q., Pashos C.L., Lipsitz S.R., and Keating N.L. Utilization and outcomes of minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 26 (2008) 2278-2284
10. Schroeck F.R., Krupski T.L., Sun L., et al. Satisfaction and regret after open retropubic or robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 54 (2008) 785-793
11. Gacci M., Lapini A., Serni S., et al. Predictors of quality of life after radical treatment for prostate cancer. Urol Int 80 (2008) 231-236
12. Schmeller N., Keller H., and Janetschek G. Head-to-head comparison of retropubic, perineal and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Int J Urol 14 (2007) 402-405
13. Vickers A.J., Bianco F.J., Gonen M., et al. Effects of pathologic stage on the learning curve for radical prostatectomy: evidence that recurrence in organ-confined cancer is largely related to inadequate surgical technique. Eur Urol 53 (2008) 960-966
14. Artibani W., Fracalanza S., Cavalleri S., et al. Learning curve and preliminary experience with da-Vinci-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Urol Int 80 (2008) 237-244