Comparison of Postoperative Urinary Control Between Prostate Cancer Radical Operation with da Vinci Robot and Laparoscopic Prostate Cancer Radical Operation
XU Ting, CAO Dehong, CHEN Ye, et al
Institute of Urology / Department of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Sichuan Chengdu 610041, China
Abstract：Objective: To compare curative effect, postoperative urinary control and safety between prostate cancer (PCa) radical operation with da Vinci robot and laparoscopic PCa radical operation, and to provide reference for developing safe and effective surgical procedures for PCa patients. Methods: A total of 255 PCa patients who were admitted to the hospital from July 2018 to January 2019 were enrolled, and divided into laparoscopic group (laparoscopic PCa radical operation, n=170) and robot group (PCa radical operation with da Vinci robot, n=85). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, recovery time of intestinal function, postoperative hospital stay and treatment cost were compared between the two groups. The urinary control status in both groups at 1 month, 6 months and 12 months after surgery was followed up. The incidence of complications was compared between the two groups. Before surgery, at 6 months and 12 months after surgery, quality of life in both groups was evaluated by expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC). Results: Compared with laparoscopic group, operation time, recovery time of intestinal function and postoperative hospital stay were significantly shorter in robot group, intraoperative blood loss was significantly less, while treatment cost was significantly higher (P<0.05). At 1 month and 6 months after surgery, urinary control rate in robot group was significantly higher than that in laparoscopic group (P<0.05). At 12 months after surgery, there was no significant difference in urinary control rate between the two groups (P>0.05). At 6 months and 12 months after surgery, there were significant differences in quality of life scores between the two groups (P<0.05). At 6 months and 12 months after surgery, total score of quality of life in robot group was significantly higher than that in laparoscopic group (P<0.05). The incidence of complications in robot group was significantly lower than that in laparoscopic group (P<0.05). Conclusion: Compared with laparoscopic PCa radical operation, PCa radical operation with da Vinci robot in treatment of PCa is of significant advantages in terms of promoting rehabilitation process, improving urinary control rate, improving prognosis and reducing complications. However, treatment cost of the latter is higher.
许婷, 曹德宏, 陈叶, 余咿淼. 机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术后和传统腹腔镜前列腺癌术后尿控对比[J]. 河北医学, 2020, 26(7): 1125-1129.
XU Ting, CAO Dehong, CHEN Ye, et al. Comparison of Postoperative Urinary Control Between Prostate Cancer Radical Operation with da Vinci Robot and Laparoscopic Prostate Cancer Radical Operation. HeBei Med, 2020, 26(7): 1125-1129.
[1] Milonas,Daimantas,Auskalnis,et al.Dutasteride for the prevention of prostate cancer in men with high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia:results of a phase III randomized open-label 3-year trial[J].World Urol,2017,35(5):721~728. [2] 孟锐,孙博,邹练.泌尿外科达芬奇机器人辅助与传统腹腔镜围术期指标比较[J].武警医学,2019,30(6):496~498. [3] 艾青,李宏召,马鑫,等.机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺根治性切除术中尿控和性功能保留的关键手术技巧[J].微创泌尿外科杂志,2017,6(1):59~61. [4] 李实,于广海.腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术治疗经尿道前列腺电切术发现的前列腺癌14例临床分析[J].中华男科学杂志,2017,23(10):903~907. [5] 潘炜.同期放疗联合内分泌治疗对中晚期前列腺癌临床疗效、并发症及生存质量的影响[J].国际泌尿系统杂志,2018,38(6):900~903. [6] 陆兆祥,周骏,邰胜,等.泌尿外科达芬奇机器人腹腔镜手术-单中心400例报道[J].安徽医科大学学报,2018,53(1):158~160,166. [7] 王帅,祁小龙,刘锋,等.尿道周围结构解剖性复位技术在机器人辅助腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术中的应用效果[J].中华泌尿外科杂志,2019,40(3):194~199.
2020, Vol. 26 
冀公网安备13080202000677号