Zhonghua nan ke xue = National journal of andrology · 2017
[Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer found in transurethral resection of the prostate: Report of 14 cases].
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Li Shi, Yu Guang-Hai
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To sum up the experience in the treatment of prostate cancer found in transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) by laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP).
METHODS: Fourteen patients found with prostate cancer during TURP underwent LRP in our hospital between 2011 and 2016. We reviewed our experience in the treatment and analyzed the clinical and follow-up data.
RESULTS: LRP was successfully performed in all the cases at 1－4 months after TURP, with a mean operation time of (113 ± 94) min (80－220 min), a mean blood loss of (188 ± 152) ml (100－500 ml), a mean catheterization time of (11.7 ± 3.7) d (7－16 d), and a median follow-up time of 28 (4－68) months. There were no rectal injuries, conversion to open surgery, or blood transfusion during the operation. Positive surgical margin was found in 1 case, in which the tumor involved the nerve and vessel, and lymphatic fistula occurred in another. Urinary continence was desirable in 13 cases at 12 months after surgery, and no incontinence was observed in the other, which had been followed up for less than 12 months. The patient with positive surgical margin received radiotherapy and endocrine therapy postoperatively and was still alive without pathologic progression. No biochemical or clinical recurrence was found in the other 13 cases.
CONCLUSIONS: LRP at 1 month after TURP can provide a proper anatomical plane, make the operation easier, and achieve a satisfactory functional and oncological prognosis for patients with prostate cancer.
METHODS: Fourteen patients found with prostate cancer during TURP underwent LRP in our hospital between 2011 and 2016. We reviewed our experience in the treatment and analyzed the clinical and follow-up data.
RESULTS: LRP was successfully performed in all the cases at 1－4 months after TURP, with a mean operation time of (113 ± 94) min (80－220 min), a mean blood loss of (188 ± 152) ml (100－500 ml), a mean catheterization time of (11.7 ± 3.7) d (7－16 d), and a median follow-up time of 28 (4－68) months. There were no rectal injuries, conversion to open surgery, or blood transfusion during the operation. Positive surgical margin was found in 1 case, in which the tumor involved the nerve and vessel, and lymphatic fistula occurred in another. Urinary continence was desirable in 13 cases at 12 months after surgery, and no incontinence was observed in the other, which had been followed up for less than 12 months. The patient with positive surgical margin received radiotherapy and endocrine therapy postoperatively and was still alive without pathologic progression. No biochemical or clinical recurrence was found in the other 13 cases.
CONCLUSIONS: LRP at 1 month after TURP can provide a proper anatomical plane, make the operation easier, and achieve a satisfactory functional and oncological prognosis for patients with prostate cancer.