Objectives. To evaluate our preliminary experience with laparoscopic radica
l prostatectomy. The indications for laparoscopy are currently being extend
ed to complex oncologic procedures.
Methods. Forty-three men underwent laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. We u
sed five trocars. The surgical technique replicates the steps of traditiona
l retropubic prostatectomy, except that the rectoprostatic cleavage plane i
s developed transperitoneally at the beginning of the procedure. In the fir
st 10 patients, we performed the vesicourethral reconstruction with interru
pted sutures; in the remaining 33 patients, we performed it with two hemici
rcumferential running sutures. the specimen was removed through the umbilic
al port site.
Results. Once the developmental phase with the first 10 patients was conclu
ded, the median operating time was 4.3 hours without pelvic lymphadenectomy
, and the median postoperative bladder catheterization was 4 days. Two (4.7
%) of 43 patients underwent transfusion. Twelve patients (27.9%) had positi
ve surgical margins; all patients had a postoperative prostate-specific ant
igen level of less than 0.1 ng/mL at 1 month. Rectal injury occurred in 1 p
atient, requiring colostomy, and 4 patients had urethrovesical anastomotic
leakages requiring surgical repair. One month postoperatively, 36 patients
(84%) were fully continent (no leakage). Six patients had had erections, an
d four stated they had had sexual intercourse.
Conclusions. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy has evolved to a fully stan
dardized and reproducible procedure. The short-term oncologic and functiona
l efficacy rates are equivalent to those for open surgery. The operating ti
me is reasonable once the learning curve is over, and postoperative morbidi
ty is diminished. Because of the improved visual accuracy, permitting more
precise dissection, this technique has the potential to become an important
advancement in urologic surgery. UROLOGY 55: 630-634, 2000. (C) 2000, Else
vier Science Inc.