scholarly journals Combined Robotic Radical Prostatectomy and Robotic Radical Nephrectomy

2010 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 603-607 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hugh J. Lavery ◽  
Shiv Patel ◽  
Michael Palese ◽  
Nabet G. Kasabian ◽  
Daniel M. Gainsburg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Radical Nephrectomy ◽  
Robotic Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Robotic Radical Nephrectomy

scholarly journals EXPERIENCE OF 424 ROBOT-ASSISTED OPERATIONS IN ST-PETERSBURG: RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY, PARTIAL AND RADICAL NEPHRECTOMY

2016 ◽  
Vol 175 (5) ◽  
pp. 74-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Kh. Al’-Shukri ◽  
M. S. Mosoyan ◽  
D. Yu. Semenov ◽  
D. M. Il’In
Keyword(s):  
Survival Rate ◽  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Radical Nephrectomy ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Da Vinci ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Cancer Specific Survival ◽  
Robotic Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Mean Time

The article presents the results of 257 robot-assisted radical prostatectomies, 135 partial nephrectomies and 32 radical nephrectomies at the period from 2010 to 2016. The operations were performed on robotic complex da Vinci S. The mean operative time was 170±50 min, 158,4±72,2 min and 143,3±67,3 min, the mean blood loss was 130±35 ml, 213,0±102,2 ml and 141,4±49,0 ml for robotic radical prostatectomy, partial and radical nephrectomy, respectively. The mean time of warm ischemia consisted of 13,1±2,7 min. Five-year cancer-specific survival rate was 100%, 100% and 98%. The overall survival rate was 97,5%, 87% and 92% for robotic radical prostatectomy, partial and radical nephrectomy, respectively.

554: Prospective Comparison of Short-Term Recovery between Open and Robotic Radical Prostatectomy

2007 ◽  
Vol 177 (4S) ◽  
pp. 184-185
Author(s):  
Ryan T. Schulte ◽  
Rodney L. Dunn ◽  
Brent K. Hollenbeck ◽  
J. Stuart Wolf ◽  
James E. Montie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Robotic Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Prospective Comparison

1590: Histopathologic Outcomes of Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: An Analysis of Positive Margin Status in 1238 Consecutive Cases

2007 ◽  
Vol 177 (4S) ◽  
pp. 526-526
Author(s):  
David C. Arend ◽  
Ketul K. Shah ◽  
Rahul K. Thaly ◽  
Jill Woolard ◽  
Vipul R. Patel
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Positive Margin ◽  
Margin Status ◽  
Robotic Radical Prostatectomy

scholarly journals Assessment of PSIM (Prostatic Systemic Inflammatory Markers) Score in Predicting Pathologic Features at Robotic Radical Prostatectomy in Patients with Low-Risk Prostate Cancer Who Met the Inclusion Criteria for Active Surveillance

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 355
Author(s):  
Matteo Ferro ◽  
Gennaro Musi ◽  
Deliu Victor Matei ◽  
Alessandro Francesco Mistretta ◽  
Stefano Luzzago ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Inflammatory Markers ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Robotic Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Lymphocyte Ratio ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Low Risk Prostate Cancer

Background: circulating levels of lymphocytes, platelets and neutrophils have been identified as factors related to unfavorable clinical outcome for many solid tumors. The aim of this cohort study is to evaluate and validate the use of the Prostatic Systemic Inflammatory Markers (PSIM) score in predicting and improving the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in men undergoing robotic radical prostatectomy for low-risk prostate cancer who met the inclusion criteria for active surveillance. Methods: we reviewed the medical records of 260 patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria for active surveillance. We performed a head-to-head comparison between the histological findings of specimens after radical prostatectomy (RP) and prostate biopsies. The PSIM score was calculated on the basis of positivity according to cutoffs (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) 2.0, platelets-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) 118 and monocyte-to-lymphocyte-ratio (MLR) 5.0), with 1 point assigned for each value exceeding the specified threshold and then summed, yielding a final score ranging from 0 to 3. Results: median NLR was 2.07, median PLR was 114.83, median MLR was 3.69. Conclusion: we found a significantly increase in the rate of pathological International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) ≥ 2 with the increase of PSIM. At the multivariate logistic regression analysis adjusted for age, prostate specific antigen (PSA), PSA density, prostate volume and PSIM, the latter was found the sole independent prognostic variable influencing probability of adverse pathology.

POTENCY FOLLOWING ROBOTIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: A QUESTIONNAIRE BASED ANALYSIS OF OUTCOMES AFTER CONVENTIONAL NERVE SPARING AND PROSTATIC FASCIA SPARING TECHNIQUES

2005 ◽  
Vol 174 (6) ◽  
pp. 2291-2296 ◽  
Author(s):  
MANI MENON ◽  
SANJEEV KAUL ◽  
AKSHAY BHANDARI ◽  
ALOK SHRIVASTAVA ◽  
ASHUTOSH TEWARI ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Nerve Sparing ◽  
Robotic Radical Prostatectomy
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document