Extraperitoneal v Intraperitoneal Robotic Prostatectomy: Analysis of Operative Outcomes
dc.contributor.author | Madi, Rabii | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Daignault, Stephanie D. | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Wood, David P. | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2009-07-10T18:57:55Z | |
dc.date.available | 2009-07-10T18:57:55Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2007-12-01 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Madi, Rabii; Daignault, Stephanie; Wood, David P. (2007). "Extraperitoneal v Intraperitoneal Robotic Prostatectomy: Analysis of Operative Outcomes." Journal of Endourology 21(12): 1553-1558 <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/63120> | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/63120 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=18186697&dopt=citation | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | Background and Purpose: Robotic prostatectomy can be performed either via an extra- or intraperitoneal approach. The extraperitoneal approach has advantages similar to those of an extraperitoneal open radical prostatectomy, but the potential disadvantages of a small working space. We report our experience using both approaches. Methods: From July 2003 to June 2004, 55 patients underwent a robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. During the first 6 months, 21 prostatectomies were performed using an intraperitoneal approach (group 1); 34 were performed using an extraperitoneal approach (group 2) during the next 6 months. Clinicopathologic parameters and perioperative complications were compared in both groups. All patients were categorized as intent-to-treat analysis. Results: Median surgery time was significantly shorter in the extraperitoneal compared with the intraperitoneal approach (3 hours and 34 minutes v 4 hours and 1 minute, respectively, P = 0.017). This was because of the shorter time interval between the skin incision and incision of the endopelvic fascia in the extraperitoneal v the intraperitoneal approach (55 minutes v 74 minutes, respectively, P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in terms of patient age, clinical and pathologic stage, length of hospital stay, and perioperative complications between the two approaches. Conclusion: Extraperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy offers a similar clinical outcome as the intraperitoneal approach. However, the extraperitoneal approach avoids potential bowel injury or complications related to an intraperitoneal urine leak. | en_US |
dc.format.extent | 175520 bytes | |
dc.format.extent | 2489 bytes | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.format.mimetype | text/plain | |
dc.publisher | Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers | en_US |
dc.title | Extraperitoneal v Intraperitoneal Robotic Prostatectomy: Analysis of Operative Outcomes | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Health Sciences | en_US |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | en_US |
dc.identifier.pmid | 18186697 | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/63120/1/end.2007.9872.pdf | |
dc.identifier.doi | doi:10.1089/end.2007.9872 | en_US |
dc.identifier.source | Journal of Endourology | en_US |
dc.identifier.source | Journal of Endourology | en_US |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.