The authors declared that they have no competing interests.
PB carried out the surgical procedures and drafted the manuscript. VI carried out the surgical procedures as assistant and drafted the manuscript. FC carried out the surgical procedures as assistant and participated in the design of the study. FDC collected all the data and performed the statistical analysis. GV carried out the surgical procedures. EFA conceived the study, participated in its design and coordination and helped to draft the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Currently, men are younger at the time of diagnosis of prostate cancer and more interested in less invasive surgical approaches (traditional laparoscopy, 3D-laparoscopy, robotics). Outcomes of continence, erectile function, cancer cure, positive surgical margins and complication are well collected in the pentafecta rate. However, no comparative studies between 4th generation 3D-HD vision system laparoscopy and standard bi-dimensional laparoscopy have been reported. This study aimed to compare the operative, perioperative data and pentafecta rates between 2D and 3D laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and to identify the actual role of 3D LRP in urology.
From October 2012 to July 2013, 86 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer [PCa: age ≤ 70 years, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≤ 10 ng/ml, biopsy Gleason score ≤ 7] underwent laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (LERP) and were followed for approximately 14 months (range 12–25). Patients were selected for inclusion via hospital record data, and divided into two groups. Their patient records were then analyzed. Patients were randomized into two groups: the former 2D-LERP (43 pts) operated with the use of 2D-HD camera; the latter 3D-LERP (43 pts) operated with the use of a 3D-HD 4th generation view system. The operative and perioperative data and the pentafecta rates between 2D-LERP and 3D-LERP were compared.
The overall pentafecta rates at 3 months were 47.4% and 49.6% in the 2D- and 3D-LERP group respectively. The pentafecta rate at 12 months was 62.7% and 67% for each group respectively. 4th generation 3D-HD vision system provides advantages over standard bi-dimensional view with regard to intraoperative steps. Our data suggest a trend of improvement in intraoperative blood loss and postoperative recovery of continence with the respect of the oncological safety.
Use of the 3D technology by a single surgeon significantly enhances the possibility of achieving better intraoperative results and pentafecta in all patients undergoing LERP. Potency was the most difficult outcome to reach after surgery, and it was the main factor leading to pentafecta failure. Nevertheless, further studies are necessary to better comprehend the role of 3D-LERP in modern urology.
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM. GLOBOCAN 2008 ver. 2.0. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 10 Lyon: IARC; c2010. Cited 2012 Jul 12. http://globocan.iarc.fr.
Hakimi AA, Feder M, Ghavamian R. Minimally invasive approaches to prostate cancer a review of the current literature. Urol J. 2007;4:130–7. PubMed
Zobel J. Basics of three-dimensional endoscopic vision. Endosc Surg Allied Technol. 1993;1:36–9. PubMed
Bove P, Iacovelli V. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. In: Laparoscopy – an interdisciplinary approach. Meinhold-Heerlein I, editor, InTech; ISBN: 978-953-307-299-9, Available from: http://www.intechopen.com/books/laparoscopy-an-interdisciplinary-approach/laparoscopic-radical-prostatectomy 2011.
Greene FL, Page DL, Fleming ID, et al. American joint committee on cancer staging manual, ed 6. New York, NY: Springer; 2002. p. 77–87. CrossRef
Robertson C, Close A, Fraser C, Gurung T, Jia X, Sharma P, et al. Relative effectiveness of robot-assisted and standard laparoscopic prostatectomy as alternatives to open radical prostatectomy for treatment of localised prostate cancer: a systematic review and mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. BJU Int. 2013;112(6):798–812. CrossRefPubMed
Babayan RK, Chiu AW, Este-McDonald J, Birkett DH. The comparison between 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional laparoscopic video systems in a pelvic trainer. J Endourol. 1993;7:S195. CrossRef
Pietrabissa A, Cancello E, Carobbi A, et al. Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional video system for the trained endoscopic surgeon and the beginner. Endosc Surg Allied Technol. 1994;2:315–7. PubMed
- 3D vs 2D laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in organ-confined prostate cancer: comparison of operative data and pentafecta rates: a single cohort study
Francesco De Carlo
Enrico Finazzi Agrò
- BioMed Central
Neu im Fachgebiet Urologie
Meistgelesene Bücher in der Urologie
Mail Icon II