Urology and Nephrology Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences
  • Register
  • Login

Urology Journal

  • Home
  • Instant Online
    • Instant 2026
    • Instant 2023
    • Instant 2021
    • Instant 2020
  • Current
  • Archives
  • Announcements
  • Submissions
  • Author Guidelines
  • About
    • About the Journal
    • Editorial Team
    • Privacy Statement
    • Contact
Advanced Search
  1. Home
  2. Archives
  3. Vol. 14 No. 1 (2017): January-February2017
  4. ORIGINAL PAPER (LAPAROSCOPIC AND ROBOTIC UROLOGY)

Vol. 14 No. 1 (2017)

January 2017

Robotic or Open Radical Prostatectomy in Men with Previous Transurethral Resection of Prostate

  • Mahmoud Mustafa
  • John W Davis
  • Sacit Nuri Gorgel
  • Louis Pisters

Urology Journal, Vol. 14 No. 1 (2017), 23 January 2017 , Page 2955-2960
https://doi.org/10.22037/uj.v14i1.3546 Published: 2017-01-18

  • View Article
  • Download
  • Cite
  • Statastics
  • Share

Abstract

Purpose: To assess and compare the surgical, oncological and functional outcomes of robotic and open radicalprostatectomy (RP) in patients with history of transurethral resection of prostate (TURP).

Material and Methods: Total of 48 patients with mean ± SD age of 64.5 ± 6.0 years who had undergone TURPprior to RP were included. Thirty-one (64.58%) patients underwent robotic RP (group I) and 17 patients underwentopen RP (group II). Variables evaluated included demographic characteristics, perioperative complications, functionaland oncological outcomes. Biochemical recurrence (BCR) was defined as a detectable level of serum PSAafter RP. Continence was defined as being pad free and potency as erection with or without medication enough forpenetration.

Results: All patients had undetectable PSA after RP. Four patients (12.9%) from group I and 2 patients (11.8%)from group II had positive margins (P = .9). The rates of continence were 70% and 80.81% for group I and groupII respectively (P = .47). Potency rate was 68.2% in group I and 46.1% in group II (P =. 31). The PSA value at thelast follow-up was undetectable except in 2 patients who had PSA values of 0.2 and 1ng/mL respectively.

Conclusion: Robotic or open RP can be performed safely and effectively after TURP without compromising theoncological results. The outcomes of robotic RP are comparable to that of open RP. The patients who undergorobotic or open RP should be informed about increased likelihood of intra operative complications and worse postoperative functional outcomes with respect to continence and erectile function.

  • PDF

How to Cite

Mustafa, M., Davis, J. W., Gorgel, S. N., & Pisters, L. (2017). Robotic or Open Radical Prostatectomy in Men with Previous Transurethral Resection of Prostate. Urology Journal, 14(1), 2955–2960. https://doi.org/10.22037/uj.v14i1.3546
  • ACM
  • ACS
  • APA
  • ABNT
  • Chicago
  • Harvard
  • IEEE
  • MLA
  • Turabian
  • Vancouver
  • Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
  • BibTeX
  • Abstract Viewed: 726 times
  • PDF Downloaded: 535 times

Download Statastics

  • Linkedin
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google Plus
  • Telegram

Information

  • For Readers
  • For Authors

Developed By

Open Journal Systems
  • Home
  • Archives
  • Submissions
  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Team
  • Contact
Powered by OJSPlus