腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术与开放术式的疗效比较Meta分析

目的利用Meta分析的方法,评价腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术(LRP)与开放前列腺癌根治术(ORP)两种手术方式治疗局限性前列腺癌的疗效。方法选取发表于1990～2011年的文献,对比LRP与ORP两种术式治疗局限性前列腺癌的随机对照试验和临床对照试验,并应用Meta分析评价手术时间、术中出血量、输血情况、切缘阳性率、术后尿道狭窄发生率、术后控尿、术后勃起功能等相关指标。结果本篇Meta分析,共分析了14篇临床同期对照试验。共纳入了9006例患者,其中行LRP3261例患者,行ORP5745例患者。对于切缘阳性的发生率,腹腔镜与ORP之间无统计学差异(OR0.88,95%CI0.77～1.01,P=0.06);LRP手术时间长于开放手术(WMD60.25min,95%CI30.83～89.68min,P<0.0001),差异具有统计学意义。LRP术中出血量小于ORP(WMD-686.61ml,95%CI-1101.49～-271.72ml,P=0.001),差异具有统计学意义。LRP患者输血率低于ORP(OR0.17,95%CI0.10～0.29,P<0.0001),差异具有统计学意义。LRP术后尿道狭窄的发生率低于ORP(OR0.32,95%CI0.14～0.71,P=0.005),差异具有统计学意义。LRP的术后一年控尿率与ORP无统计学差异(OR1.29,95%CI0.88～1.89,P=0.20)。术中保留双侧性神经的患者的术后一年勃起功能,LRP优于ORP(OR2.23,95%CI1.48～3.36,P=0.0001)。结论对于局限性前列腺癌,腹腔镜与ORP的切缘阳性发生率和术后一年控尿功能相似。LRP的手术时间长于ORP,但术中出血量少于ORP,患者输血率小于ORP,且术后尿道狭窄发生率和术后一年阳痿发生率小于ORP。     

Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths among men, after lung cancer. Traditionally, the traumatic open radical prostatectomy procedure was the only treatment option available. Although nerve-sparing techniques have evolved, the development of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) has been one of the most significant changes in surgical treatment of the disease. Like many minimally invasive abdominal procedures, LRP reduces trauma, resulting in less postoperative pain, reduced length of hospital stay, and more rapid return to normal activity when compared to open radical prostatectomy. This article describes the preoperative, Intraoperative, and postoperative care of a patient undergoing LRP. It is anticipated that LRP will be the future standard for treatment of prostate cancer that requires radical surgery. AORN J75 (April 2002) 762-782.     

Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a European virus.

The evolution of prostate cancer treatment has now incorporated the principles of minimally invasive surgery. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, just like a virus, infected first Europe and three years ago the United States. This European virus has nowadays a potentially widespread application. Oncological efficacy and ability to preserve and improve continence and potency are the factors that will ultimately determine the role of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and thus the future of this virus infection. This article reviews the current published experience with minimally invasive prostatectomy and provides comparisons to published data on radical retropubic prostatectomy to increase awareness about viability. Some prospective and retrospective non-randomized comparative studies of the two approaches are also included in the present review. The current practice patterns regarding urological laparoscopic surgery and the tendency of the urologic community in Europe and in the United States to establish minimally invasive radical prostatectomy in more urological departments are described.     

Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a less invasive approach

The author discusses laparoscopic radical prostatectomy from the perspective of patient assessment/selection, approach, patient perioperative experience, and a partial comparison between open and laparoscopic prostatectomy.     

Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: A European virus

The evolution of prostate cancer treatment has now incorporated the principles of minimally invasive surgery. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, just like a virus, infected first Europe and three years ago the United States. This European virus has nowadays a potentially widespread application. Oncological efficacy and ability to preserve and improve continence and potency are the factors that will ultimately determine the role of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and thus the future of this virus infection. This article reviews the current published experience with minimally invasive prostatectomy and provides comparisons to published data on radical retropubic prostatectomy to increase awareness about viability. Some prospective and retrospective non‐randomized comparative studies of the two approaches are also included in the present review. The current practice patterns regarding urological laparoscopic surgery and the tendency of the urologic community in Europe and in the United States to establish minimally invasive radical prostatectomy in more urological departments are described.     

腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术要点与技巧

前列腺癌是一种常见的男性泌尿生殖系统肿瘤,传统的外科性手术治疗仍旧是早期前列腺癌的有效治疗方法。其中腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术已经成为前列腺外科治疗的常规方法。本文对已经开展的腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术要点及技巧结合相关文献做一综述性分析。     

腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术与开放手术的比较

目的 通过腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术(LRP)和开放前列腺癌根治术(ORP)的对照研究,评价LRP在临床的应用价值.方法 收集前列腺癌根治术病例44例,其中行LRP15例、ORP 29例.比较两组间手术疗效及安全性.结果 LRP组15例,成功完成14例.患者平均手术时间为(271.21±109.20)min,平均出血量(395.57±310.07)ml.ORP组29例患者平均手术时间(154.73±64.95) min,平均出血量(746.62±604.55)ml.两组出血量和手术时间比较,差异均有统计学意义(t分别=4.39、2.04,P均＜0.05);而两组住院时间和术后血清前列腺特异抗原(PSA)比较,差异均无统计学意义(t分别=1.98、1.27,P均＞0.05).结论 LRP在出血的控制方面优于ORP,LRP是安全可行的.     

机器人辅助腹腔镜实施前列腺癌根治术的护理配合

探讨了机器人辅助腹腔镜实施前列腺癌根治术的护理配合.器械护士做好术中机器人系统的无茵操作,以及机械手臂的更换;巡回护士做好有效的体位安置,术中密切观察病情变化,确保术中机器人系统的正常运转,以及术后机器人系统的维护和管理.手术患者均能很好地配合.护理人员专业技术的正规培训、充分的术前准备、良好的沟通、设备的有效管理是确保手术成功的关键.     

经腹膜外腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术治疗高危前列腺癌的临床研究（附49例报告）

目的评价经腹膜外腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术治疗高危前列腺癌患者的安全性及疗效。方法该科自2012年1月-2015年8月对49例高危前列腺癌患者行经腹膜外腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术,术中采用了"三明治"法进行尿道重建。结果 49例手术均获得成功,无中转开放手术。手术时间平均(2.15±0.29)h,术中出血量(60.25±20.29)ml,没有直肠损伤出现。患者术后1或2 d可以下地活动。术后病理显示盆腔淋巴结转移5例,切缘阳性13例。3例患者术后出现轻度尿失禁,2例患者出现尿道狭窄。对其中46例患者随访1~43个月,5例患者出现生化复发。结论经腹膜外腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术治疗高危前列腺癌安全、有效。熟悉前列腺局部解剖及熟练掌握各种腹腔镜下操作技术是手术成功的关键。     

Laparoscopic radical partial nephrectomy of a renal tumour: Initial case report

Summary. Advances in laparoscopic surgery have been made with development of improving tools and techniques which have expanded the application of laparoscopy to include successful management of renal neoplasm. Herein, we present a case of an incidentally discovered lower pole renal tumour effectively treated by a laparoscopic ‘radical’ partial nephrectomy.     

Perceptions and experiences after radical prostatectomy in Turkish men: a descriptive qualitative study

Radical prostatectomy (RP) can significantly influence men's quality of life. Data from the Ministry of Health's Fight With Cancer Office Directorate in 2003 show that prostate cancer is third among the 10 most common types of cancer in men, with an incidence of 5.97% in the population. The objectives of this study were to define the experiences and perceptions of Turkish men who have undergone RP and to determine the views and suggestions of men who had undergone RP as to their discharge training content. Following the RP, urinary incontinence (UI) and erectile dysfunction (ED) negatively affect the daily life of men. It has been determined that men need support to deal with these problems they met. Being discharged without obtaining information from the health care staff regarding home catheter care and UI and ED management causes men to experience difficulties and find it difficult to cope when faced with these problems.     

Understanding urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy: a nursing framework

Prostate cancer is one of the most prevalent malignancies diagnosed in North American men. Typically, men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer have two options for curative treatment: radiation therapy or radical prostatectomy (RP). Many men choose RP to remove the cancer; however, the intervention has two possible side effects that patients dread: erectile dysfunction and urinary incontinence (UI). At least 50% of men who undergo RP suffer from UI, which can lead to embarrassment, loss of a sense of control, depression, and decreased social interactions. The Human Response to Illness Model provides a framework to gain a comprehensive understanding of the physiologic, pathophysiologic, behavioral, and experiential perspectives as well as personal and environmental factors related to UI following RP. Knowledge gained from these perspectives will help nurses design strategies that facilitate coping and improve outcomes in men with UI following RP.     

Quality of life post radical prostatectomy: a male perspective

The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the meaning and effect of urinary incontinence and impotence on the quality of life for men with prostate cancer. The Cancer Recovery Model guided the study. This model is based on the assumption that the chronicity of cancer is a function of recovery as well as illness and focuses on the strength of an individual to regain his powers of survival until death. The study identified indicators for quality of life for men who have had a radical prostatectomy for cancer that should be included in developing discharge teaching plans and reinforced in community followup.     

解剖性耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术

虽然近年来腹腔镜手术及机器人辅助腹腔镜手术发展迅速,但解剖性耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术仍是治疗局限性前列腺癌的金标准。经过20多年的不断改进与创新,这项手术技术无论在安全性还是从有效性上都得到了很大的提高,同时也存在一定的并发症,如术中出血、直肠损伤、术后尿失禁、勃起功能障碍等。本文结合临床经验体会,对解剖性耻骨后前列腺癌根治术的要点进行详尽探讨,并对近年来手术技巧方面的改进作一简要阐述。     

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

•

ROBOTIC-ASSISTED radical prostatectomy uses the newest technology for surgical treatment of men with prostate cancer. Cancer of the prostate is the most common cancer in men and the second leading cause of death in American men.

•

THE BENEFITS of robotic-assisted prostate surgery over open radical prostatectomy include small portal incisions, decreased blood loss, and shorter hospital stays.

•

MAGNIFICATION of the surgeon's field of vision and jointed laparoscopic instruments that mimic the human wrist allow precision of movement and the ability to spare nerves, which result in improved postoperative urinary continence and sexual function. AORN J 84 (November 2006) 760-770. © AORN, Inc, 2006.

     

Transperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

The diagnosis of prostate cancer for any male of any age can profoundly affect his life and that of his family. Improvements in laparoscopic devices, combined with associated surgical equipment and innovative urologic uses, have changed the treatment choices and outcomes for these types of patients. Transperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (TLRP) offers improved postoperative outcomes for patients with localized prostatic cancer, decreasing the profound postoperative effects on functional return and potency. Quantitative advantages of TLRP include increased safety, lower hospital costs, and length of stay, while qualitative advantages include increased patient satisfaction, accelerated recovery, and qualitatively improved functional return.     

Minimally invasive radical prostatectomy

The development of advanced laparoscopic techniques and robot-assisted technology has resulted in several new surgical approaches for treating organ-confined prostate cancer. Outcomes with these new or minimally Invasive techniques should be assessed carefully to ensure that they are similar to or surpass patients' oncologic and functional outcomes after open radical prostatectomy. This article reviews the current published experience with minimally Invasive approaches to increase awareness about viability. Several of the larger series of patients who have undergone laparoscopic (transperitoneal and extraperitoneal) or robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomies are discussed and evaluated critically. Comparisons to published data on open radical prostatectomy are included for completeness. The different minimally invasive techniques are described and contrasted in regard to prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival, surgical margin status, blood loss, transfusion rates, postoperative pain, length of hospitalization, duration of urinary catheterization, potency, continence, and complications. The relative costs of each method are provided. The coexistence of multiple surgical approaches should and can challenge surgeons who perform open and minimally invasive procedures to strive for a new standard of care above and beyond what is accepted today to minimize patient morbidity while maximizing functional and oncologic outcomes.