Comparative analysis of radical prostatectomy techniques using perineal or suprapubic approach in the treatment of localized prostate cancer

Objective: To compare the results of radical prostatectomy by perineal and suprapubic approaches as to operative time, procedure costs, and surgical site complications. Methods: The medical records of localized prostate cancer patients (PSA ≤ 10 ng/ml and Gleason score ≤ 6) were analyzed. Fifty-five...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Gelbert Luiz Chamon do Carmo Amorim, Geraldo Magela Gomes da Cruz, Denny Fabrício Magalhães Veloso, José David Kartabil, José Carlos Vieira, Paulo Roberto Alves
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Instituto Israelita de Ensino e Pesquisa Albert Einstein 2010-06-01
Series:Einstein (São Paulo)
Subjects:
Online Access:http://apps.einstein.br/revista/arquivos/PDF/1592-Einstein_v8n2_p200-4.pdf
Description
Summary:Objective: To compare the results of radical prostatectomy by perineal and suprapubic approaches as to operative time, procedure costs, and surgical site complications. Methods: The medical records of localized prostate cancer patients (PSA ≤ 10 ng/ml and Gleason score ≤ 6) were analyzed. Fifty-five patients were submitted to radical prostatectomy by perineal approach and 54 via suprapubic approach. Results: There were statistical differences between groups as to operative time (p < 0.05); for perineal approach it was in average 114 minutes (SD ± 0.03) and for suprapubic approach, an average of 167 minutes (SD ± 0.041). Prostatectomy via perineal approach resulted in 11 cases of surgical complications, and suprapubic approach, 3 cases. Conclusions: Radical prostatectomy via perineal approach took less time at a lower cost as compared to the suprapubic approach. However, there were more complications in patients submitted to perineal approach, mainly rectal lesions.
ISSN:1679-4508