Effect of pelvimetric diameters on success of surgery in patients submitted to robot-assisted perineal radical prostatectomy

Abstract

Objective: Minimally invasive techniques are used increasingly by virtue of advancements in technology. Surgery for prostate cancer, which has high morbidity, is performed with an increasing momentum based on the successful oncological and functional outcomes as well as cosmetic aspects. Materials and methods: Sixty two patients underwent robot-assisted perineal radical prostatectomy (R-PRP) surgery at our clinic between November 2016 and August 2017. Six pelvimetric dimensions were defi ned and measured by performing multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) prior to operation in all patients. In light of these data, we aimed to investigate the effect of pelvimetric measurements on surgery duration and surgical margin positivity. Results: By using this technique in pelvic area, we observed that measurements only representing surgical site and excluding other pelvic organs had a signifi cant effect on surgery duration, and pelvic dimensions had no signifi cant effect on surgical margin positivity. Conclusion: In R-PRP technique, peroperative fi ndings and oncological outcomes can vary depending on several variable factors, but although usually not taken into account, pelvimetric measurements can also affect these outcomes. However, there is a need for randomised controlled trials to be conducted with more patients.

Incontinence after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a reverse systematic review

“…Finally, the results found in this study must be evaluated with caution regarding biases when comparing continence rates after LRP before and after 2011, especially if one is inclined to compare them to open radical prostatectomy and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RALP) rates. This novel methodology of RSR also allows for PPI measurement criteria and their rates to be compared in future studies, including RALP, which is the main RP technique currently (16)(17)(18). Its strength is beyond scientometrics, adding to the evidence-based medicine by temporally analyzing the surgical complication in question, allowing possible projections for the future, and exposing significant bias neglected by SRs.…”