Health-related Quality of Life in the First Year after Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy Compared with Open Radical Prostatectomy

Abstract

Urinary function in the first year after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is worse than that after open radical prostatectomy.

Prospective longitudinal outcomes of quality of life after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy compared with retropubic radical prostatectomy

“…Ultimately, 105 consecutive patients were treated between January 2011 and June 2012. The indication for surgery and the surgical technique have been described previously [ 10 ]. During this period, only LRP was performed because RRP had been shifted completely to LRP.…”

“…Oncological outcomes of LRP and RRP have been widely examined [ 2 – 5 ], but there are fewer reports on functional outcomes [ 6 – 8 ]. Functional outcomes after LRP have been shown to be similar or worse than those after RRP [ 9 , 10 ]. Namiki et al found delayed recoveries of urinary function and sexual function in LRP compared to RRP [ 7 ], whereas Ball et al reported similar outcomes for urinary incontinence after LRP and RRP [ 9 ].…”

“…Namiki et al found delayed recoveries of urinary function and sexual function in LRP compared to RRP [ 7 ], whereas Ball et al reported similar outcomes for urinary incontinence after LRP and RRP [ 9 ]. In an earlier study, we investigated postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQOL) to evaluate functional outcomes in the first year after LRP [ 10 ]. The results showed poor urinary function, and especially urinary incontinence, after LRP.…”

Relationship of Positive Resection Margin, Cancer Location and Learning Curve after Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy

“…The remaining 331 patients were enrolled in this study. Our surgical procedure was described previously [12]. Briefly, the procedure was performed with an extraperitoneal and antegrade approach.…”

Management and treatment of men affected by metastatic prostate cancer: evidence‐based recommendations for practice

“…Supportive care is a person‐centred approach to the provision of the necessary services for those living with or affected by cancer to meet their informational, spiritual, emotional, social or physical needs during diagnosis, treatment or follow‐up phases including issues of health promotion, survivorship, palliation and bereavement (Rittenberg et al , , Carter et al , , Hui, ). While the physical and psychological sequelae of prostate cancer and its associated treatments have been well‐documented, little is known about men's perceptions about the impact of these on their lives and the areas in which they require most assistance (van Tol‐Geerdink et al , , Waller and Pattison, , Hashine et al , , Prabhu et al , ). One approach to quality of life evaluation that assesses supportive care requirements is holistic needs assessment (HNA) (Bonevski et al , ).…”