Contemporary Radical Prostatectomy

Abstract EN

Purpose.

Patients diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer have more surgical treatment options than in the past.

This paper focuses on the procedures' oncological or functional outcomes and perioperative morbidities of radical retropubic prostatectomy, radical perineal prostatectomy, and robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Materials and Methods.

A MEDLINE/PubMed search of the literature on radical prostatectomy and other new management options was performed.

Results.

Compared to the open procedures, robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy has no confirmed significant difference in most literatures besides less blood loss and blood transfusion.

Nerve sparing is a safe means of preserving potency on well-selected patients undergoing radical prostatectomy.

Positive surgical margin rates of radical prostatectomy affect the recurrence and survival of prostate cancer.

The urinary and sexual function outcomes have been vastly improved.

Neoadjuvant treatment only affects the rate of positive surgical margin.

Adjuvant therapy can delay and reduce the risk of recurrence and improve the survival of the high risk prostate cancer.

Conclusions.

For the majority of patients with organ-confined prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy remains a most effective approach.

Radical perineal prostatectomy remains a viable approach for patients with morbid obesity, prior pelvic surgery, or prior pelvic radiation.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) has become popular among surgeons but has not yet become the firmly established standard of care.

Long-term data have confirmed the efficacy of radical retropubic prostatectomy with disease control rates and cancer-specific survival rates.