Predictive factors for return of erectile function in robotic radical prostatectomy: Case series from a single centre

International Journal of Impotence Research

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 29-32

  Garcia, F J ^a,b   Violette, P D ^a,b   Brock, G B ^b   Pautler, S E ^b  

^a WESTERN UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b ST JOSEPH S HEALTH CENTRE   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PHOSPHODIESTERASE V INHIBITOR; PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BODY MASS; CASE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISSECTION; ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERNATIONAL INDEX OF ERECTILE FUNCTION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OPERATION DURATION; PENIS ERECTION; POSTOPERATIVE CARE; PROSTATECTOMY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; RETURN OF ERECTILE FUNCTION; ROBOTICS; SEMINAL VESICLE; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; ADVERSE EFFECTS; CONVALESCENCE; INNERVATION; MIDDLE AGED; PENIS; PROCEDURES; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PENILE ERECTION; PENIS; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84920508453     PISSN: 09559930     EISSN: 14765489     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ijir.2014.20     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Government of Canada Public Health Agency of Canada. Prostate Cancer-Chronic Diseases-Public Health Agency of Canada 2 March 2009.
2. Cancer of the Prostate-SEER Stat Fact Sheets [Internet]. [cited 27 January 2014]. Available from: http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/prost.html.
3. Walsh PC, Lepor H, Eggleston JC. Radical prostatectomy with preservation of sexual function: anatomical and pathological considerations. Prostate 1983; 4: 473-485.
4. Menon M, Tewari A, Baize B, Guillonneau B, Vallancien G. Prospective comparison of radical retropubic prostatectomy and robot-assisted anatomic prostatectomy: the Vattikuti Urology Institute experience. Urology 2002; 60: 864-868.
5. Ficarra V, Novara G, Ahlering TE, Costello A, Eastham Ja, Graefen M et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 418-430.
6. Ficarra V, Novara G, Artibani W, Cestari A, Galfano A, Graefen M et al. Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol 2009; 55: 1037-1063.
7. Savera AT, Kaul S, Badani K, Stark AT, Shah NL, Menon M. Robotic radical prostatectomy with the 'Veil of Aphrodite' technique: histologic evidence of enhanced nerve sparing. Eur Urol 2006; 49: 1065-1073.
8. Tewari A, Rao S, Martinez-Salamanca JI, Leung R, Ramanathan R, Mandhani A et al. Cancer control and the preservation of neurovascular tissue: how to meet competing goals during robotic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2008; 101: 1013-1018.
9. Schatloff O, Chauhan S, Kameh D, Valero R, Ko YH, Sivaraman A et al. Cavernosal nerve preservation during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy is a graded rather than an all-or-none phenomenon: objective demonstration by assessment of residual nerve tissue on surgical specimens. Urology 2012; 79: 596-600.
10. Patel VR, Sivaraman A, Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Palmer KJ, Orvieto MA et al. Pentafecta: a new concept for reporting outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2011; 59: 702-707.
11. Martńez CH, Chalasani V, Lim D, Nott L, Al-Bareeq RJ, Wignall GR et al. Effect of prostate gland size on the learning curve for robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: does size matter initially? J Endourol 2010; 24: 261-266.
12. Alemozaffar M, Duclos A, Hevelone ND, Lipsitz SR, Borza T, Yu H-Y et al. Technical refinement and learning curve for attenuating neurapraxia during roboticassisted radical prostatectomy to improve sexual function. Eur Urol 2012; 61: 1222-1228.
13. Chin JL, Luke PP, Pautler SE. Initial experience with robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in the Canadian health care system. Can Urol Assoc J 2007; 1: 97-101.
14. Schatloff O, Chauhan S, Sivaraman A, Kameh D, Palmer KJ, Patel VR. Anatomic grading of nerve sparing during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2012; 61: 796-802.
15. Kiyoshima K, Yokomizo A, Yoshida T, Tomita K, Yonemasu H, Nakamura M et al. Anatomical features of periprostatic tissue and its surroundings: a histological analysis of 79 radical retropubic prostatectomy specimens. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2004; 34: 463-468.
16. Masterson Ta, Serio AM, Mulhall JP, Vickers AJ, Eastham JA. Modified technique for neurovascular bundle preservation during radical prostatectomy: association between technique and recovery of erectile function. BJU Int 2008; 101: 1217-1222.
17. Gratzke C, Strong TD, Gebska Ma, Champion HC, Stief CG, Burnett AL et al. Activated RhoA/Rho kinase impairs erectile function after cavernous nerve injury in rats. J Urol Elsevier Inc 2010; 184: 2197-2204.
18. Leungwattanakij S, Bivalacqua TJ, Usta MF, Yang D-Y, Hyun J-S, Champion HC et al. Cavernous neurotomy causes hypoxia and fibrosis in rat corpus cavernosum. J Androl 2003; 24: 239-245.
19. User HM, Hairston JH, Zelner DJ, McKenna KE, McVary KT. Penile weight and cell subtype specific changes in a post-radical prostatectomy model of erectile dysfunction. J Urol 2003; 169: 1175-1179.
20. Salonia A, Burnett AL, Graefen M, Hatzimouratidis K, Montorsi F, Mulhall JP et al. Prevention and management of postprostatectomy sexual dysfunctions. Part 1: choosing the right patient at the right time for the right surgery. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 261-272.
21. Iacono F, Giannella R, Somma P, Manno G, Fusco F, Mirone V. Histological alterations in cavernous tissue after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2005; 173: 1673-1676.
22. Moreland RB. Is there a role of hypoxemia in penile fibrosis: a viewpoint presented to the Society for the Study of Impotence. Int J Impot Res 1998; 10: 113-120.
23. Garcia FJ, Brock G. Current state of penile rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy. Curr Opin Urol 2010; 20: 234-240.
24. Mulhall JP, Bivalacqua TJ, Becher EF. Standard operating procedure for the preservation of erectile function outcomes after radical prostatectomy. J Sex Med 2013; 10: 195-203.
25. Eastham Ja, Scardino PT, Kattan MW. Predicting an optimal outcome after radical prostatectomy: the trifecta nomogram. J Urol 2008 Jun; 179: 2207-2210, discussion 2210-1.
26. Ficarra V, Sooriakumaran P, Novara G, Schatloff O. Systematic review of methods for reporting combined outcomes after radical prostatectomy and proposal of a novel system : the survival, continence, and potency (SCP) classification. Eur Urol 2012; 61: 541-548.
27. Pautler SE. Reporting the Canadian robotic experience: the outcomes and how we report them. Can Urol Assoc J 2013; 7: 333-334.
28. Kilminster S, Müller S, Menon M, Joseph JV, Ralph DJ, Patel HRH. Predicting erectile function outcome in men after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. BJU Int 2012; 110: 422-426.
29. Alemozaffar M, Regan MM, Cooperberg MR, Wei JT, Michalski JM, Sandler HM et al. Prediction of erectile function following treatment for prostate cancer. JAMA 2011; 306: 1205-1214.
30. Rosen RC, Riley A, Wagner G, Osterloh IH, Kirkpatrick J, Mishra A. The international index of erectile function (IIEF): a multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology 1997; 49: 822-830.
31. Rosen RC, Cappelleri JC, Smith MD, Lipsky J, Penã BM. Development and evaluation of an abridged, 5-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) as a diagnostic tool for erectile dysfunction. Int J Impot Res 1999; 11: 319-326.
32. Van der Poel HG, Tillier C, de Blok WM, Acar C, EHAM van Muilekom, RCN van den Bergh. Interview-based versus questionnaire-based quality of life outcomes before and after prostatectomy. J Endourol 2013; 27: 1411-1416.
33. Moskovic DJ, Alphs H, Nelson CJ, Rabbani F, Eastham J, Touijer K et al. Subjective characterization of nerve sparing predicts recovery of erectile function after radical prostatectomy: defining the utility of a nerve sparing grading system. J Sex Med 2011; 8: 255-260.