Does transition from standard to Retzius-sparing technique in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy affect the functional and oncological outcomes?

dc.authorscopusid57194181662
dc.authorscopusid57188972324
dc.authorscopusid56999899900
dc.authorscopusid12243570500
dc.contributor.authorAnil,H.
dc.contributor.authorKaramik,K.
dc.contributor.authorYildiz,A.
dc.contributor.authorSavaş,M.
dc.date.accessioned2024-05-25T12:34:04Z
dc.date.available2024-05-25T12:34:04Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.departmentOkan Universityen_US
dc.department-tempAnil H., Department of Urology, Adana Seyhan State Hospital, Adana, Turkey; Karamik K., Department of Urology, Antalya Korkuteli State Hospital, Antalya, Turkey; Yildiz A., Department of Urology, Okan University Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey; Savaş M., Department of Urology, Antalya Memorial Hospital, Antalya, Turkeyen_US
dc.description.abstractObjective: To appraise the outcomes on the Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (Rs-RARP) learning curve of a surgeon with previous experience of anterior (standard) RARP. Materials and methods: The first 50 cases during the Rs-RARP learning curve (group 1) and 50 cases after the second 100 cases with the standard approach (group 2) were comprised in the study. Patients who used zero or one safety pads were considered continent. Erectile function recuperation was characterized as the competence to achieve penetrative intercourse without receiving any medication. All patients were reevaluated at two weeks, first, third, sixth, and 12th months after surgery using IIEF-5, PSA level, and continence status. Results: Immediate continence rates following catheter removal were 32/50 (64%) in Rs-RARP group and 26/50 (52%) in S-RARP group (p = 0.224). The continence recovery rate was 48/50 (96%) in Rs-RARP group and 46/50 (92%) in the S-RARP group at 12 months follow-up (p = 0.400). Total nerve-sparing surgery was enforced in 36/50 (72%) patients for group 1 and 35/50 (70%) patients for group 2. Potency recovery was 27/43 (62.8%) in Rs-RARP and 30/44 (68.2%) for S-RARP at 12 months follow up (p = 0.597). Surgical margin positivity was detected in 6/50 (12%) cases in the Rs-RARP group and in 4/50 (8%) cases in the S-RARP (p = 0.444). Conclusions: Functional and oncological results are not negatively affected in the first 50 cases for a surgeon who is experienced in S-RARP before transition to the Rs-RARP method. © 2021 Edizioni Scripta Manent s.n.c.. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.identifier.citation3
dc.identifier.doi10.4081/aiua.2021.4.399
dc.identifier.endpage403en_US
dc.identifier.issn1124-3562
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.pmidPubMed:34933525
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85122395303
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ3
dc.identifier.startpage399en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2021.4.399
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14517/2535
dc.identifier.volume93en_US
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherPage Press Publicationsen_US
dc.relation.ispartofArchivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologiaen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectLearning curveen_US
dc.subjectRadical prostatectomyen_US
dc.subjectRetziussparingen_US
dc.subjectRobotic surgeryen_US
dc.subjectTrifectaen_US
dc.titleDoes transition from standard to Retzius-sparing technique in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy affect the functional and oncological outcomes?en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files