Purpose: To critically review perioperative outcomes, positive surgical margin (PSM) rates, and functional outcomes of several large series of retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP), laparoscopic RP (LRP), and robotassisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) currently available in the literature. Methods: A Medline database search was performed from November 1994 to May 2009, using medical subject heading search terms ''prostatectomy'' and ''Outcome Assessment (Health Care)'' and text words ''retropubic,'' ''robotic,'' and ''laparoscopic.'' Only studies with a sample size of 250 or more patients were considered. Weighted means were calculated for all outcomes using the number of patients included in each study as the weighing factor. Results: We identified 30 articles for RRP, 14 for LRP, and 14 for RARP. The mean intraoperative and postoperative RRP transfusion rates for RRP, LRP, and RARP were 20.1%, 3.5%, and 1.4%, respectively. The weighted mean postoperative complication rates for RRP, LRP, and RARP were 10.3% (4.8% to 26.9%), 10.98% (8.9 to 27.7%), and 10.3% (4.3% to 15.7%), respectively. RARP revealed a mean overall PSM rate of 13.6%, whereas LRP and RRP yielded a PSM of 21.3% and 24%, respectively. The weighted mean continence rates at 12 month follow-up for RRP, LRP, and RARP were 79%, 84.8%, and 92%, respectively. The weighted mean potency rates for patients who underwent unilateral or bilateral nerve sparing, at 12 month follow-up, were 43.1% and 60.6% for RRP, 31.1% and 54% for LRP, and 59.9% and 93.5% for RARP. Conclusion: RRP, LRP, and RARP performed in high-volume centers are safe options for treatment of patients with localized prostate cancer, presenting similar overall complication rates. LRP and RARP, however, are associated with decreased operative blood loss and decreased risk of transfusion when compared with RRP. Our analysis including high-volume centers also showed lower weighted mean PSM rates and higher continence and potency rates after RARP compared with RRP and LRP. However, the lack of randomized trials precludes definitive conclusions.

. All patients were operated by the same laparoscopically naive surgeons. The comparison was by matched-pair analysis. RESULTSThe baseline characteristics of the two groups were equivalent, although there was a higher percentage of patients with pT3/pT4 disease in the RRP group. As a proxy for oncological outcome, positive surgical margins were equivalent in the two groups (22% RARP vs 25% RRP, P = 0.77). The overall mean (range) surgical duration was significantly longer in RARP group, at 215 (165-450) min vs 160 (90-240) min in the RRP group ( P < 0.001). However, RARP had a statistically significant advantage over RRP for estimated blood loss, of 200 vs 800 mL ( P < 0.001), duration of catheterization (6 vs 7 days P < 0.001) and length of stay (3 vs 6 days, P < 0.001) The 3, 6 and 12-month continence rates were 70%, 93% and 97% vs 63%, 83% and 88% after RARP and RRP, respectively ( P = 0.15, 0.011 and 0.014). The 3, 6 and 12 month overall potency recovery rate was 31%, 43% and 61% vs 18%, 31% and 41%, after RARP and RRP, respectively ( P = 0.006, 0.045 and 0.003). CONCLUSIONOur initial experience showed the feasibility of RARP in a laparoscopically naive centre. RRP seems to be a faster procedure, whereas RARP provided better results in terms of estimated blood loss, hospitalization and functional results. The early oncological outcome seemed to be equivalent in the two groups.

What ' s known on the subject? and What does the study add?The open simple prostatectomy (OSP) is the ' gold standard ' for high-volume prostate adenomas. It shows very good functional results despite its invasiveness. Minimally invasive approaches, e.g. laparoscopy or holmium laser enucleation of the prostate, have been ' tested ' but none have proved a substitute for the OSP.The robot-assisted approach provides optimal functional results and is easy to perform for experienced robotic surgeons. Extending the indication of robotics to low-incidence pathologies can take advantage of the opportunity to ' see the procedure ' using available information technology, e.g. Youtube TM that presents as an unexpectedly useful tool. OBJECTIVE• To evaluate the outcome, feasibility and reproducibility of a robot-assisted (RA) approach for simple prostatectomy (SP) in cases of high-volume symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (HVS-BPH). PATIENTS AND METHODS• In all, 35 consecutive patients underwent RASP for HVS-BPH using a previously described technique.• The mean prostate volume on preoperative transrectal ultrasonography was 106.6 mL.• All but two patients (with bladder calculi) had an adenoma volume of > 65 mL and 27 (77.1%) > 80 mL. Nine patients (25.7%) had an indwelling catheter.• The mean International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) was 28. RESULTS• The median operative duration was 180 min and the mean hospital stay was 3.17 days.• The mean catheter duration was 7.4 days and discontinuous or continuous catheter irrigation was required in two and seven patients, respectively (25.1%).• In all, 10 patients (28.6%) had practically no blood loss. No patients had a transfusion.• The mean postoperative peak urinary fl ow was 18.9 mL/s ( P < 0.001), while the mean IPSS was 7 ( P < 0.001).• For costs, while superfi cially RASP appeared more expensive than open SP (OSP), when considering the higher costs of hospitalisation for OSP, RASP was cheaper. Also, bipolar-TURP costs in patients with large-volume prostates had rather similar costs to RASP. CONCLUSIONS• RASP is a feasible and reproducible procedure with outcome advantages when compared with the open or with other minimally invasive techniques (laser or laparoscopy). As a result, a RA approach is worth considering in cases of high-volume prostate adenomas.• Extending the indication of the RA approach, to the SP, requires fi rstly that the surgeon be profi cient in RA surgery and secondly that as the incidence rate of HVS-BPH is low, the surgeon has had the opportunity to ' see the procedure ' . calculi, diverticula, etc.) were present. In fact, for these patients, OSP seems to be more effective and safer than TURP [ 7 ] .Nevertheless, looking at historical and more recent series [ 1 -7 ] one notices that, while

No abstract

Peyronie's disease (PD) is an acquired connective tissue disorder of the tunica albuginea with fibrosis and inflammation that lead to palpable plaques formation, penile curvature, and pain during erection. Patients report negative effects on main domains such as physical appearance and self-image, sexual function, and performance. The aim of this study was to evaluate plication of the albuginea outcomes after a long-term follow-up period. Between 1998 and 2006, a total of 204 patients with PD underwent surgical correction with albuginea plication technique. We obtained complete long-term follow-up data in 187 cases. The follow-up data included evaluation of curvature correction, penile shortening, sexual function, complications, and patient satisfaction. After a mean follow-up of 141 months, the most common postoperative complications were: loss of length (150 patients had a minimal penile shortening ≤1.5 cm, 37 patient between 1.5, and 3 cm, none >3 cm), recurrent or residual penile curvature (15 patients, without impairing sexual intercourse), erectile dysfunction (15 patients had IIEF-5 < 10 at 5 years of follow-up vs. 28 patients at 10 years), change in penile sensation (37 patients experienced paresthesia of the glans 1 year after surgery, 28 at 5 years, and 15 at 10 years); painful or palpable suture knots (in 20 cases) spontaneously healed in 3 months. Overall, 77% of the patients and partners were completely satisfied, 14% partially satisfied, and 9% unsatisfied. Plication procedure is safe and simple to be performed compared with the classical Nesbit's procedure. It has a shorter surgical time, lower costs, and could be successfully performed by less experienced surgeons too. It has a minimal risk of de novo erectile dysfunction, injury to the dorsal neurovascular bundle. Results are good in terms of patient satisfaction according to anatomical outcome and functional correction.