Margin control in robotic and laparoscopic prostatectomy: What are the REAL outcomes?

Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations

Volumn 28, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 210-214

  Weizer, Alon Z ^a   Strope, Seth ^a   Wood Jr , David P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

Outcomes; Prostate cancer; Prostatectomy

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; REVIEW;

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

EID: 77249132638     PISSN: 10781439     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2009.08.009     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. Eastham J.A., Kattan M.W., Riedel E., et al. Variations among individual surgeons in the rate of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 170 (2003) 2292-2295
2. Vickers A.J., Bianco F.J., Serio A.M., et al. The surgical learning curve for prostate cancer control after radical prostatectomy. J Natl Cancer Inst 99 (2007) 1171-1177
3. Weizer A.Z., Ye Z., Hollingsworth J.M., et al. Adoption of new technology and healthcare quality: Surgical margins after robotic prostatectomy. Urology 70 (2007) 96-100
4. Atug F., Castle E.P., Srivastav S.K., et al. Positive surgical margins in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: Impact of learning curve on oncologic outcomes. Eur Urol 49 (2006) 866-871
5. Han M., Partin A.W., Zahurak M., et al. Biochemical (prostate-specific antigen) recurrence probability following radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 169 (2003) 517-523
6. Roehl K.A., Han M., Ramos C.G., et al. Cancer progression and survival rates following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy in 3,478 consecutive patients: Long-term results. J Urol 172 (2004) 910-914
7. Emanuel E.J., Fuchs V.R., and Garber A.M. Essential elements of a technology and outcomes assessment initiative. JAMA 298 (2007) 1323-1325
8. Karakiewicz P.I., Eastham J.A., Graefen M., et al. Prognostic impact of positive surgical margins in surgically treated prostate cancer: Multi-institutional assessment of 5831 patients. Urology 66 (2005) 1245-1250
9. Salomon L., Levrel O., De la Taille A., et al. Radical prostatectomy by the retropubic, perineal, and laparoscopic approach: 12 years of experience in one center. Eur Urol 42 (2002) 104-110
10. Goeman L., Salomon L., De la Taille A., et al. Long-term functional and oncologic results after retroperitoneal laparoscopic prostatectomy according to prospective evaluation of 550 patients. World J Urol 24 (2006) 281-288
11. Guillonneau B., el-Fettouh H., Baumert H., et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Oncologic evaluation after 1,000 cases at Montsouris Institute. J Urol 169 (2003) 1261-1266
12. Rassweiler J., Schulze M., Teber D., et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with the Heilbronn technique: Oncologic results in the first 500 patients. J Urol 173 (2005) 761-764
13. Patel V.R., Shah S., and Arend D. Histopathologic outcomes of robotic radical prostatectomy. ScientificWorldJournal 6 (2006) 2566-2572
14. Menon M., Shrivastava A., Kaul S., et al. Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: Contemporary technique and analysis of results. Eur Urol 51 (2007) 648-657
15. Touijer K., Kuroiwa K., Saranchuk J.W., et al. Quality improvement in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for pT2 prostate cancer: Impact of video documentation review on positive surgical margin. J Urol 173 (2005) 765-768
16. Ahlering T.E., Eichel L., Edwards R.A., et al. Robotic radical prostatectomy: A technique to reduce pT2 positive margins. Urology 64 (2004) 1224-1228
17. Galli S., Simonato A., Bozzola A., et al. Oncologic outcome and continence recovery after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: 3-year follow-up in a "second generation center.". Eur Urol 49 (2006) 859-865