Intra- and early postoperative complications of laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
- Authors: Isaev O.A.1, Kyzlasov P.S.1, Sergeyev V.P.1, Gullyamov E.E.1, Volodin D.I.1, Korobov A.A.1, Pomeshkin E.V.2, Kuzmin I.V.3
-
Affiliations:
- Burnazyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center
- Clinical Hospital of St. Luke
- Academician I.P. Pavlov First St. Petersburg State Medical University
- Issue: Vol 14, No 3 (2024)
- Pages: 351-358
- Section: Reviews
- URL: https://ogarev-online.ru/uroved/article/view/277118
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.17816/uroved635161
- ID: 277118
Cite item
Abstract
Radical prostatectomy is the gold standard for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. In the last decade, new surgical technologies have been actively implemented that certainly increases the efficiency of oncourological treatment. The rate of intra- and postoperative complications of radical prostatectomy yet remains quite high. In this regard, crucial tasks of modern urology are minimizing of their number and effective treatment. In the review article, intra- and early postoperative complications of laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy have been considered.
Full Text
##article.viewOnOriginalSite##About the authors
Osman A. Isaev
Burnazyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center
Email: iosman97@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0004-3910-9430
Russian Federation, Moscow
Pavel S. Kyzlasov
Burnazyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center
Author for correspondence.
Email: dr.kyzlasov@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1050-6198
SPIN-code: 6806-7913
MD, Dr. Sci. (Medicine), Professor
Russian Federation, MoscowVladimir P. Sergeyev
Burnazyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center
Email: garivas@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0193-4054
SPIN-code: 6616-1642
Russian Federation, Moscow
Eduard E. Gullyamov
Burnazyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center
Email: eduarg@mail.ru
Russian Federation, Moscow
Denis I. Volodin
Burnazyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center
Email: volodin666@mail.ru
Russian Federation, Moscow
Alexey A. Korobov
Burnazyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center
Email: corobov97@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8796-0183
Russian Federation, Moscow
Evgeny V. Pomeshkin
Clinical Hospital of St. Luke
Email: pomeshkin@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5612-1878
SPIN-code: 5661-1947
MD, Cand. Sci. (Medicine)
Russian Federation, Saint PetersburgIgor V. Kuzmin
Academician I.P. Pavlov First St. Petersburg State Medical University
Email: kuzminigor@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7724-7832
SPIN-code: 2684-4070
MD, Dr. Sci. (Medicine), Professor
Russian Federation, Saint PetersburgReferences
- Pernar CH, Ebot EM, Wilson KM, Mucci LA. The epidemiology of prostate cancer. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2018;8(12): a030361. doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a030361
- Kaprina AD, Starinsky BB, Petrova GV, editors. Malignant neoplasms in Russia in 2017 (morbidity and mortality). Moscow; P.A. Herzen Moscow Research Institute of Oncology; 2018. 250 p. (In Russ.)
- Schuessler WW, Schulam PG, Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short-term experience. Urology. 1997;50(6):854–857. doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00543-8
- Binder J, Kramer W. Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2001;87(4):408–410. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2001.00115.x
- Martínez-Holguín E, Herranz-Amo F, Hernández-Cavieres J, et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy compared to open radical prostatectomy: Comparison between surgical time, complications and length of hospital stay. Actas Urol Esp (Engl Ed). 2020;44(1):41–48. doi: 10.1016/j.acuro.2019.06.008
- Sujenthiran A, Nossiter J, Parry M, et al. National cohort study comparing severe medium-term urinary complications after robot-assisted vs laparoscopic vs retropubic open radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2018;121(3):445–452. doi: 10.1111/bju.14054
- Ryabov MA, Byadretdinov IS, Kotov SV. Robot-assisted and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy learning curve. Experimental and Clinical Urology. 2021;14(4):37–43. EDN: THLXDC doi: 10.29188/2222-8543-2021-14-4-37-43
- Hasson HM. A modified instrument and method for laparoscopy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1971;110(6):886–887. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(71)90593-x
- Hasson HM. Open laparoscopy vs. closed laparoscopy: a comparison of complication rates. Adv Plan Parent. 1978;13(3–4):41–50.
- Schäfer M, Lauper M, Krähenbühl L. Trocar and Veress needle injuries during laparoscopy. Surg Endosc. 2001;15(3):275–280. doi: 10.1007/s004640000337
- Catarci M, Carlini M, Gentileschi P, Santoro E. Major and minor injuries during the creation of pneumoperitoneum. A multicenter study on 12,919 cases. Surg Endosc. 2001;15(6):566–569. doi: 10.1007/s004640000381
- Stolzenburg J-U, Rabenalt R, Do M, et al. Complications of endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE): prevention and management. World J Urol. 2006;24(6):668–675. doi: 10.1007/s00345-006-0133-8
- Haeuser L, Reese SW, Paciotti M, et al. surgical complications requiring intervention in open versus minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. Urol Int. 2022;106(1):51–55. doi: 10.1159/000515618
- Novara G, Ficarra V, Rosen RC, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2012;62(3):431–452. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.044
- Ploussard G, Briganti A, de la Taille A, et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: efficacy, limitations, and complications — a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2014;65(1):7–16. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.057
- Fossati N, Willemse P-PM, Van den Broeck T, et al. The benefits and harms of different extents of lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: A systematic review. Eur Urol. 2017;72(1):84–109. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.12.003
- Davis JW, Shah JB, Achim M. Robot-assisted extended pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) at the time of radical prostatectomy (RP): a video-based illustration of technique, results, and unmet patient selection needs. BJU Int. 2011;108(6b):993–998. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10454.x
- Lestingi JFP, Guglielmetti GB, Trinh Q-D, et al. Extended versus limited pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer: early oncological outcomes from a randomized phase 3 trial. Eur Urol. 2021;79(5): 595–604. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.11.040
- Touijer KA, Sjoberg DD, Benfante N, et al. Limited versus extended pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: A randomized clinical trial. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021;4(4):532–539. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.03.006
- Jhaveri JK, Penna FJ, Diaz-Insua M, et al. Ureteral injuries sustained during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2014;28(3):318–324. doi: 10.1089/end.2013.0564
- Gözen AS, Aktoz T, Akin Y, et al. Is it possible to draw a risk map for obturator nerve injury during pelvic lymph node dissection? The heilbronn experience and a review of the literature. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2015;25(10):826–832. doi: 10.1089/lap.2015.0190
- Rassweiler J, Hruza M, Teber D, Su L-M. Laparoscopic and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy — critical analysis of the results. Eur Urol. 2006;49(4):612–624. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.12.054
- La Riva A, Sayegh AS, Perez LC, et al. Obturator nerve injury in robotic pelvic surgery: scenarios and management strategies. Eur Urol. 2023;83(4):361–368. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.12.034
- Froehner M, Novotny V, Koch R, et al. Perioperative complications after radical prostatectomy: open versus robot-assisted laparoscopic approach. Urol Int. 2013;90(3):312–315. doi: 10.1159/000345323
- Murphy DG, Bjartell A, Ficarra V, et al. Downsides of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: limitations and complications. Eur Urol. 2010;57(5):735–746. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.12.021
- Lei Y, Alemozaffar M, Williams SB, et al. Athermal division and selective suture ligation of the dorsal vein complex during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of technique and outcomes. Eur Urol. 2011;59(2):235–243. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.08.043
- Li H, Liu C, Zhang H, et al. The use of unidirectional barbed suture for urethrovesical anastomosis during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety. PLoS One. 2015;10(7):e0131167. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131167
- Kowalewski KF, Tapking C, Hetjens S, et al. Interrupted versus continuous suturing for vesicourethral anastomosis during radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus. 2019;5(6):980–991. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2018.05.009
- Matsuyama H, Matsumoto H, Nagao K, et al. Running suture versus interrupted suture for vesicourethral anastomosis in retropubic radical prostatectomy: a randomized study. Int J Urol. 2015;22(3):271–277. doi: 10.1111/iju.12667
- Al-Shukri SK, Nevirovich ES, Kuzmin IV, Boriskin AG. Early and late complications of radical prostatectomy. Urology reports (St. Petersburg). 2012;2(2):10–14. EDN: PZHTET doi: 10.17816/uroved2210-14
- Pompe RS, Beyer B, Haese A, et al. Postoperative complications of contemporary open and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy using standardised reporting systems. BJU Int. 2018;122(5):801–807. doi: 10.1111/bju.14369
- Tillier C, van Muilekom HAM, Bloos-van der Hulst J, et al. Vesico-urethral anastomosis (VUA) evaluation of short- and long-term outcome after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP): selective cystogram to improve outcome. J Robot Surg. 2017;11(4):441–446. doi: 10.1007/s11701-017-0677-1
- Motterle G, Morlacco A, Zanovello N, et al. Surgical strategies for lymphocele prevention in minimally invasive radical prostatectomy and lymph node dissection: A systematic review. J Endourol. 2020;34(2):113–120. doi: 10.1089/end.2019.0716
- Cacciamani GE, Maas M, Nassiri N, et al. Impact of pelvic lymph node dissection and its extent on perioperative morbidity in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021;4(2):134–149. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.02.00
- Tsaur I, Thomas C. Risk factors, complications and management of lymphocele formation after radical prostatectomy: A mini-review. Int J Urol. 2019;26(7):711–716. doi: 10.1111/iju.13964
Supplementary files
