Home > Journals > Minerva Chirurgica > Past Issues > Minerva Chirurgica 2019 February;74(1) > Minerva Chirurgica 2019 February;74(1):37-53

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe PROMO
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Cite this article as

 

REVIEW  PROSTATE CANCER 

Minerva Chirurgica 2019 February;74(1):37-53

DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4733.18.07740-4

Copyright © 2018 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in 2018: 20 years of worldwide experiences, experimentations, researches and refinements

Aldo BRASSETTI 1 , Renaud BOLLENS 2, 3

1 Department of Urology, Vincenzo Pansadoro Foundation, Center for Laparoscopic Urology and Medical Oncology, Rome, Italy; 2 Department of Urology, Université Nord de France, St Phillibert Hospital, GHICL, Lille, France; 3 Wallonie Picarde Hospital, Tournai, Belgium



INTRODUCTION: After the first feasibility report in 1997, a growing interest has risen in the urologic community for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and several authors have contributed to the evolution of the technique. We attempt a review of the available evidences and provide a broad framework of different technical refinements considering their impact on pentafecta.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The PubMed/Medline database was searched. Duplicates and “Expert opinion” papers were removed. Studies were included according to the aim of the present paper to present a selected review on LRP and report our personal experience.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: In 1999 Guillonneau et al. codified their transperitoneal-posterior-antegrade technique for LRP. Since then, several modifications of the transperitoneal approach were published and the extraperitoneal route was also proposed. Sparing the bladder neck and reconstructing the posterior muscolofascial plate were proven to improve continence rate. Nerve-sparing LRP were performed in order to maximize postoperative recovery of the sexual function. Novel techniques to ligate the Santorini plexus and sew the urethrovesical anastomosis provided improvement in operative time, intraoperative blood loss and reduced the incidence of postoperative urinary-leakages. In the recent years, the single-site approach as pushed the limits of LRP and three-dimensional (3D) systems for endoscopic surgery were developed.
CONCLUSIONS: Thanks to several technical improvements, LRP provides brilliant oncologic and functional outcomes and it is now considered the treatment of choice in many institutions worldwide. Although it is a technically demanding procedure, the recent introduction of 3D systems will reduce the steepness of its learning curve.


KEY WORDS: Laparoscopy - Prostatectomy - Review

top of page