Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: technical and early oncological assessment of 40 operations.

Abstract

To evaluate the technical feasibility, oncological efficacy and intraoperative and postoperative morbidity of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. We describe an original technique of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy performed in 40 patients between 26th January and 12th October, 1998. Radical prostatectomy was performed entirely by laparoscopy in 35 patients (87.5%) and only one conversion was performed in the last 26 patients (4%). Pelvic lymphadenectomy was performed in the light of preoperative staging data in 14 patients (35%). The median total operating time was 270 min. The only major complication was a rectal injury (patient 8), sutured laparoscopically with an uneventful postoperative course. Postoperative vesical catheterization lasted an average of 7.65 days. Seven patients were transfused (17.5%) with an average of 2.8 units of packed cells (range: 2-3). The reduction of postoperative pain is an element allowing for a rapid discharge of the patients by the 3rd postoperative day. The oncological results were as follows: 36 patients had a pT2 tumor (90%); prostate tumor was staged as N0 in 14 cases and NX in 26 cases. Surgical margins were negative in 33 patients (82.5%). Two patients had a doubtful resection margin (1 at the apex and 1 at the bladder neck) and 5 patients had positive margins. The last PSA level was undetectable (<0.1 ng/ml) in 26 (89.7%) of the 29 patients in whom PSA level was available more than 1 month after the operation. Functional results are not yet available and will be published later. Radical prostatectomy is an operation which can be routinely performed by laparoscopy by a team experienced with this technique. Operative and postoperative morbidity was low. Short-term oncological data appear identical to the results of conventional retropubic surgery. The improvement of operative visibility was considerable allowing a much more precise dissection. The laparoscopic approach appears to represent a technical improvement of the radical prostatectomy if the functional results of this operation improve parallel to the quality of dissection. A long-term follow-up is needed to define definitively the place of this new approach to radical prostatectomy.