Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Uro-oncology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust.
Department of Urology, San Raffaele Turro Hospital, Milan, Italy.
Eur Urol. 2018 Apr;73(4):618-627. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.08.015. Epub 2017 Sep 4.
Whether surgeons perform better utilising a robot-assisted laparoscopic technique compared with an open approach during prostate cancer surgery is debatable.
To report erectile function and early oncologic outcomes for both surgical modalities, stratified by prostate cancer risk grouping.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In a prospective nonrandomised trial, we recruited 2545 men with prostate cancer from seven open (n=753) and seven robot-assisted (n=1792) Swedish centres (2008-2011).
Clinometrically-validated questionnaire-based patient-reported erectile function was collected before, 3 mo, 12 mo, and 24 mo after surgery. Surgeon-reported degree of neurovascular-bundle preservation, pathologist-reported positive surgical margin (PSM) rates, and 2-yr prostate-specific antigen-relapse rates were measured.
Among 1702 preoperatively potent men, we found enhanced erectile function recovery for low/intermediate-risk patients in the robot-assisted group at 3 mo. For patients with high-risk tumours, point estimates for erectile function recovery at 24 mo favoured the open surgery group. The degree of neurovascular bundle preservation and erectile function recovery were greater correlated for robot-assisted surgery. In pT2 tumours, 10% versus 17% PSM rates were observed for open and robot-assisted surgery, respectively; corresponding rates for pT3 tumours were 48% and 33%. These differences were associated with biochemical recurrence in pT3 but not pT2 disease. The study is limited by its nonrandomised design and relatively short follow-up.
Earlier recovery of erectile function in the robot-assisted surgery group in lower-risk patients is counterbalanced by lower PSM rates for open surgeons in organ-confined disease; thus, both open and robotic surgeons need to consider this trade-off when determining the plane of surgical dissection. Robot-assisted surgery also facilitates easier identification of nerve preservation planes during radical prostatectomy as well as wider dissection for pT3 cases.
For prostate cancer surgery, an open operation reduces erection problems in high-risk cancers but has higher relapse rates than robotic surgery. Relapse rates appear similar in low/intermediate-risk cancers and the robot appears better at preserving erections in these cases.
在前列腺癌手术中,外科医生使用机器人辅助腹腔镜技术是否比开放手术效果更好,这一点存在争议。
报告两种手术方式的勃起功能和早期肿瘤学结果,并按前列腺癌风险分组进行分层。
设计、地点和参与者:在一项前瞻性非随机试验中,我们从瑞典的 7 个开放(n=753)和 7 个机器人辅助(n=1792)中心招募了 2545 名前列腺癌患者(2008-2011 年)。
使用经过临床验证的基于问卷的患者报告勃起功能,在手术前、术后 3 个月、12 个月和 24 个月进行收集。测量外科医生报告的神经血管束保留程度、病理学家报告的阳性手术切缘(PSM)率以及 2 年前列腺特异性抗原复发率。
在 1702 名术前勃起功能正常的男性中,我们发现机器人辅助组的低/中危患者在术后 3 个月时勃起功能恢复增强。对于高危肿瘤患者,24 个月时勃起功能恢复的点估计值有利于开放手术组。机器人辅助手术中神经血管束的保留程度与勃起功能的恢复相关性更大。在 pT2 肿瘤中,开放手术和机器人辅助手术的 PSM 率分别为 10%和 17%;相应的 pT3 肿瘤的比率分别为 48%和 33%。这些差异与 pT3 疾病的生化复发相关,但与 pT2 疾病无关。该研究的局限性在于其非随机设计和相对较短的随访时间。
在低危患者中,机器人辅助手术组的勃起功能恢复更早,但开放性手术医生在器官受限疾病中的 PSM 率更低,因此,当确定手术解剖平面时,开放和机器人外科医生都需要考虑到这一权衡。机器人辅助手术还可以在根治性前列腺切除术中更容易识别神经保留平面,并为 pT3 病例提供更广泛的解剖。
对于前列腺癌手术,开放手术可降低高危癌症的勃起问题,但复发率高于机器人手术。在低/中危癌症中,复发率似乎相似,机器人在这些病例中似乎更能保留勃起功能。