Erhan ATEŞ, Yiğit AKIN, Arif KOL, Osman KÖSE, Sacit GÖRGEL, Serkan ÖZCAN, Yüksel YILMAZ

Üç port ve konvansiyonel ekstraperitoneal laparoskopik radikal prostastatektomi uygulanan hastalarda erektil fonksiyonun karşılaştırılması

AMAÇ: Prostat kanseri nedeniyle 3-port ve konvansiyonel yöntemle ekstraperitoneal laparaskopik radikal prostatektomi (eLRP) uygulanan hastaların postoperatif erken dönem erektil fonksiyonlarını karşılaştırmayı amaçladık. GEREÇ ve YÖNTEM: Eylül 2016 ve Ekim 2018 arasında prostat kanseri nedeni ile eLRP yapılan hastaların verileri retrospektif olarak değerlendirildi. Tüm hastalar 3 port ile eLRP yapılan ve konvansiyonel eLRP yapılanlar olarak iki gruba ayrıldı. Hastaların erektil fonksiyonlarını değerlendirmek için preoperatif ve postoperatif 6. ayda uluslararası erektil fonksiyon indeksi-5 (IIEF-5) formu kullanıldı. IIEF-5 skoru >21 olan hastalar potent, IIEF-5 skoru

Comparison of erectile function in patients undergoing extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostastatectomy by three port and conventional method

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the early postoperative erectile functions of patients who underwent extraperitoneal laparascopic radical prostatectomy (eLRP) with 3-port and conventional methods for prostate cancer. MATERIAL and METHODS: We reviewed the medical records of the patients who underwent radical prostatectomy between September 2016 and October 2018 retrospectively. The patients were divided into two groups as 3-ports eLRP and conventional eLRP. International erectile function index-5 (IIEF-5) form was used preoperatively and postoperatively at the 6th month to evaluate the erectile function of the patients. Patients with IIEF-5 score >21 were considered as potent, and IIEF-5

PDF

___

1. Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, van der Kwast T, et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update. Eur Urol 2013;65:124–37. [CrossRef]
2. Bianco FJ Jr, Scardino PT, Eastham JA. Radical prostatectomy: long-term cancer control and recovery of sexual and urinary function (“trifecta”). Urology 2005;66:83–94. [CrossRef]
3. Eggleston JC, Walsh PC. Radical prostatectomy with preservation of sexual function: pathological findings in the first 100 cases. J Urol 1985;134:1146–8. [CrossRef]
4. Schuessler WW, Schulam PG, Clayman RV, Vancaille TH. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial case report. J Urol 1992;147:246–7.
5. Schuessler WW, Schulam PG, Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short-term experience. Urology 1997;50:854–7. [CrossRef]
6. Guillonneau B, el-Fettouh H, Baumert H, Cathelineau X, Doublet JD, Fromont G, Vallancien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Oncological evaluation after 1000 cases at Montsouris Institute. J Urol 2003;169:1261–6. [CrossRef]
7. Tienza A, Akin Y, Rassweiler J, Gözen AS. A match-pair analysis of continence in intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer patients after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: the role of urine loss ratio and predictive analysis. Prostate Int 2018;6:94–8. [CrossRef]
8. Gözen AS, Tokas T, Akin Y, Klein J, Rassweiler J. Impact of barbed suture in controlling the dorsal vein complex during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 2015;24:108–13. [CrossRef]
9. Tracy CR, Raman JD, Cadeddu JA, Rane A. Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery in urology: where have we been and where are we heading? Nat Clin Pract Urol 2008;5:561–8. [CrossRef]
10. Akita H, Nakane A, Ando R, Yamada K, Kobayashi T, Okamura T, Kohri K.. Reduced port surgery for prostate cancer is feasible: Comparative study of 2-port laparoendoscopic and conventional 5-port laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2013;14:6311–4. [CrossRef]
11. Barbosa HN Jr, Siqueira TM Jr, Barreto F, Menezes LG, Luna MJC, Calado AA. 4-Ports endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy: preliminary and learning curve results. Int Braz J Urol 2016;42:438–48. [CrossRef]
12. Rassweiler J, Sentker L, Seemann O, Hatzinger M, Stock C, Frede T. Heilbronn laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Technique and results after 100 cases. Eur Urol 2001;40:54–64. [CrossRef]
13. Fulmer BR, Bissonette EA, Petroni GR, Theodorescu D. Prospective assessment of voiding and sexual function after treatment for localized prostate carcinoma: Comparison of radical prostatectomy to hormonobrachytherapy with and without external beam radiotherapy. Cancer 2001;91:2046–55. [CrossRef]
14. Potosky AL, Davis WW, Hoffman RM, Stanford JL, Stephenson RA, Penson DF, Harlan LC. Five-year outcomes after prostatectomy or radiotherapy for prostate cancer: The prostate cancer outcomes study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:1358–67. [CrossRef]
15. Hu JC, Elkin EP, Pasta DJ, Lubeck DP, Kattan MW, Carroll PR, Litwin MS. Predicting quality of life after radical prostatectomy: results from CaPSURE. J Urol 2004;171:703–8. [CrossRef]
16. Rabbani F, Stapleton AM, Kattan MW, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT. Factors predicting recovery of erections after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2000;164:1929–34. [CrossRef]
17. Montorsi F, Briganti A, Salonia A, Rigatti P, Burnett AL. Current and future strategies for preventing and managing erectile dysfunction following radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2004;45:123–33. [CrossRef]
18. Haffner MC, Landis PK, Saigal CS, Carter HB, Freedland SJ. Health-related quality-of-life outcomes after anatomic retropubic radical prostatectomy in the phosphodiesterase type 5 ERA: impact of neurovascular bundle preservation. Urology 2005;66:371–6. [CrossRef]
19. Penson DF, McLerran D, Feng Z, Li L, Albertsen PC, Gilliland FD, et al. 5-year urinary and sexual outcomes after radical prostatectomy: results from the prostate cancer outcomes study. J Urol 2005;173:1701–5. [CrossRef]
20. Dubbelman YD, Dohle GR, Schröder FH. Sexual function before and after radical retropubic prostatectomy: a systematic review of prognostic indicators for a successful outcome. Eur Urol 2006;50:711–20. [CrossRef]
21. 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;55:1037–63. [CrossRef]
22. 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;62:418–30. [CrossRef]
23. Moran PS, O’Neill M, Teljeur C, Flattery M, Murphy LA, Smyth G, Ryan M. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open and laparoscopic approaches: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Int J Urol 2013;20:312–21. [CrossRef]
24. Basiri A, de la Rosette JJ, Tabatabaei S, Woo HH, Laguna MP, Shemshaki H. Comparison of retropubic, laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy: who is the winner? World J Urol 2018;36:609–21. [CrossRef]
25. Bolenz C, Freedland SJ, Hollenbeck BK, Lotan Y, Lowrance WT, Nelson JB, Hu JC. Costs of radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2014;65:316–24. [CrossRef]
26. Salomon L, Anastasiadis AG, Katz R, De La Taille A, Saint F, Vordos D, et al. Urinary Continence and erectile function: A prospective evaluation of functional results after radical laparoscopic prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2002;42:338–43. [CrossRef]
27. Kaouk JH, Goel RK, Haber GP, Crouzet S, Desai MM, Gill IS. Single-Port Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy. Urology 2008;72:1190–3. [CrossRef]
28. Humphreys MR, Castle EP, Andrews PE. Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic radical prostatectomy (notes RP): the evolution of the technique. Arch Esp Urol 2012;65:407–14.
29. Lee JY, Ha US, Lee SW. Initial Experience of Laparoendoscopic SingleSite Radical Prostatectomy Requiring Well-Equipped Appliances and a Skilled Technique. Case Rep Oncol 2010;3:445–50. [CrossRef]
30. Gao Y, Xu DF, Liu YS, Cui XG, Che JP, Yao YC, Yin L. Single plus one port laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a report of 8 cases in one center. Chin Med J (Engl) 2011;124:1580–2.