Complicaciones de una serie consecutiva de 133 casos de prostatectomía radical

Martín, J.A. Portillo; Velázquez, Miguel Ángel Rado; Baños, J.L. Gutiérrez; García, B. Martín; Rodríguez, Rafael Hernández; Schaan, J.I. Del Valle; Gómez, Miguel Ángel Sánchez; Edreira, A. Roca; Castrillo, Azucena

doi:10.1016/s0210-4806(01)72672-1

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It can occur during apical dissection while attempting to develop the plane between the rectum and Denonvilliers' fascia [4]. Previous series of community-based practice demonstrated 1.5% to 2.2% incidences of rectal injury during radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP), and 0.6% to 9% of the cases were finally diagnosed as RUF [5–7]. RUF can appear after RP, even if there is no finding of rectal injury during the operation.…”

Section: Incidence and Diagnosis Of Ruf After Rpmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rectourinary Fistula after Radical Prostatectomy: Review of the Literature for Incidence, Etiology, and Management

Kitamura

Tsukamoto

2011

Prostate Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although rectourinary fistula (RUF) after radical prostatectomy (RP) is rare, it is an important issue impairing the quality of life of patients. If the RUF does not spontaneously close after colostomy, surgical closure should be considered. However, there is no standard approach and no consensus in the literature. A National Center for Biotechnology Information (NVBI) PubMed search for relevant articles published between 1995 and December 2010 was performed using the medical subject headings “radical prostatectomy” and “fistula.” Articles relevant to the treatment of RUF were retained. RUF developed in 0.6% to 9% of patients after RP. Most cases required colostomy, but more than 50% of them needed surgical fistula closure thereafter. The York-Mason technique is the most common approach, and closure using a broad-based flap of rectal mucosa is recommended after excision of the RUF. New techniques using a sealant or glue are developing, but further successful reports are needed.

show abstract

Section: Incidence and Diagnosis Of Ruf After Rpmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rectourinary Fistula after Radical Prostatectomy: Review of the Literature for Incidence, Etiology, and Management

Kitamura

Tsukamoto

2011

Prostate Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Para que los costes entre la PRA y la PRR se hubieran igualado, la estancia de la primera debería ser mayor de 5 días (6,3 exactamente) manteniéndose en 1.3 el de la PRR. Revisando las estancias medias de las series españolas publicadas (abiertas y laparoscópicas) vemos que en la mayoría de ellas la estancia es muy superior a los 5 días [19][20][21][22] . Para hacerse una idea del significado económico que pudiera tener la reducción en la estancia en nuestro medio, Herranz et al estimaron el coste de un día de ingreso hospitalario en un Servicio de Urología (Año 2003) en 298 euros 23 .…”

Section: Análisis De Costesunclassified

Razones técnicas y económicas para la implantación de la Cirugía Robótica en un Sistema Público de Salud (modelo español)

Martínez-Salamanca

Almagro

2007

Actas Urológicas Españolas

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Radical prostatectomy (RP) is today, in any of its four approaches (perineal (PRP), retropubic (ARP), laparoscopic (LRP) or robotic (RRP), the standard surgical treatment in localized prostate cancer. It looks clear that the minimum invasive approaches (laparoscopy and robotics) are able to reduce hospital stay as well as blood loss and therefore transfusion requirement. Also, laparoscopic results at mid and robotics at short term, seem to indicate, that both are safe oncologically and able to obtain same or even superior, functional results. Our objective has been to evaluate the economic impact that these techniques have to consider their definitive implantation, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of its potential implementation in our health system.

show abstract

Section: Análisis De Costesunclassified

Razones técnicas y económicas para la implantación de la Cirugía Robótica en un Sistema Público de Salud (modelo español)

Martínez-Salamanca

Almagro

2007

Actas Urol Esp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

La prostatectomía radical (PR) en cualquiera de sus cuatro abordajes (perineal (PRP), retropúbico (PRA), laparoscópico (PRL) o robótico (PRR)) es hoy en día, el estándar de tratamiento quirúrgico del cáncer de próstata en estadios localizados. Parece claro, que los abordajes mínimamente invasivos (laparoscopia y robótica) son capaces de disminuir la estancia hospitalaria así como la pérdidas sanguíneas y por tanto la necesidad de transfusión. Asimismo, los resultados a medio plazo de la laparoscopia y a corto plazo de la robótica, parecen indicar, que son igual de seguras oncológicamente y capaces de conseguir los mismos o incluso superiores, resultados funcionales. Nuestro objetivo ha sido evaluar el impacto económico que tienen estas técnicas para considerar su definitiva implantación, así como las ventajas e inconvenientes de su potencial implantación en nuestro Sistema Sanitario.

show abstract

Complicaciones de una serie consecutiva de 133 casos de prostatectomía radical

Cited by 6 publications

References 13 publications

Rectourinary Fistula after Radical Prostatectomy: Review of the Literature for Incidence, Etiology, and Management

Rectourinary Fistula after Radical Prostatectomy: Review of the Literature for Incidence, Etiology, and Management

Razones técnicas y económicas para la implantación de la Cirugía Robótica en un Sistema Público de Salud (modelo español)

Razones técnicas y económicas para la implantación de la Cirugía Robótica en un Sistema Público de Salud (modelo español)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About