robotic simple prostatectomy: initial single-center experience in taiwan
Clicks: 249
ID: 172433
2016
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
30.0
/100
249 views
51 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #82 of 280 articles by views in acta crystallographica section e
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 280 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Objective: For patients with symptomatic large volume benign prostate hyperplasia, open simple prostatectomy has traditionally been the treatment of choice but laparoscopic simple prostatectomy (LSP) has become an effective surgical option. Since the first case of LSP was described in 2002, surgeons have continued to expand the use of minimally invasive surgery. In 2008, the first case of robotic simple prostatectomy (RSP) was reported. We herein report our initial experience with robotic simple prostatectomy.
Materials and methods: We performed retropubic robotic simple prostatectomy using a transperitoneal approach in 10 patients. All of them had significant symptomatic prostate enlargement confirmed by abdominal or transrectal ultrasound (mean 138.2 mL). Demographic data, perioperative outcomes, and functional outcomes were recorded.
Results: The median age of patients was 68 years (range 60–76 years). The median International Prostate Symptom Score at baseline was 24 (range 18–34). The median operation time was 150 minutes (range 130–180 minutes). The median estimated blood loss was 100 mL (range 50–850 mL). Intraoperative blood transfusion was required in one patient (10%). The median resected prostate weight was 77.5 g (range 60–120 g). The median hospital stay was 5 days (range 3–5 days). The median urethral catheterization was 12 days (range 9–14 days). All of these patients gained significant improvement in maximum urine flow rate (preoperative vs. postoperative 9.8 mL/min vs. 21.5 mL/min, p = 0.001) and postvoid residual urine (preoperative vs. postoperative 125 mL vs. 10 mL, p = 0.001).
Conclusion: Robotic simple prostatectomy is a feasible alternative for a greatly enlarged prostate gland with acceptable complications.
| Reference Key |
wang2016urologicalrobotic
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Shu-Chi Wang;Cheng-Kuang Yang;Chih-Peng Chang;Yen-Chuan Ou |
| Journal | acta crystallographica section e |
| Year | 2016 |
| DOI |
10.1016/j.urols.2015.11.113
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.