摘要
摘要：目的探讨局限性前列腺癌经腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术与经耻骨后前列腺癌根治术疗效对比分析。方法收集2010年1月一2012年12在泌尿外科行前列腺癌根治术患者87例，根据不同手术治疗方法分为观察组和对照组，观察组41例行腹腔镜下前列腺癌根治术，对照组46例行经耻骨后前列腺癌根治术的开放性手术，比较两组患者术中术后情况，并对相关数据进行分析。结果行腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术的41例患者均获成功，无中转开放手术，观察组平均手术时间（337．4±123．6）min，明显长于对照组手术时间（182．4±81．8）min，两者差异有显著性（P〈0．05）；观察组出血量为（764．1±654．3）mL，明显少于对照组（1352．4±966．5）mL（P〈0．05）；观察组住院时间为（15．3±7．5）mL，明显少于对照组（24．1±8．9）mL（P〈0．05）；观察组尿失禁、尿漏、吻合口狭窄及勃起功能障碍等并发症发生率34．15％（14／41），而对照组并发症发生率为34．78％（16／46）。所有患者均获得随访，随访时间2—2．5年，观察组术后1年生化复发率为7．32％，术后2年生化复发率为21．95％；对照组术后1年生化复发率为8．70％，术后2年生化复发率为30．43％，两组差异无显著性（p〉O．05）；观察组术后1年完全控尿率为53．66％，术后2年完全控尿率为82．93％，对照组术后1年完全控尿率为52．17％，术后2年完全控尿率为76．09％，两组差异无显著性（P〉0．05）。结论腹腔镜下前列腺癌根治术具有出血少、创伤小、术后恢复快等优点，并且与经耻骨后前列腺癌根治术治疗效果相同，两者生化复发率和并发症差异无显著性，腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术是治疗局限性前列腺癌更好的方法。
[ Objective ] To compare and study the treatment efficacy between laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and open retropubic radical prostatectomy as the treatment of localized prostate cancer. [ Methods ] The clinical data of 41 cases of patients underwent laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and 46 cases of patients underwent open retropubic radical prostastectomy were analyzed retrospectively at our hospital between Jan 2010 and Dec 2012. 87 cases were all diagnosed as prostate cancer by Pathology through prostate biopsy before operation. Indexes of operating time, bleeding volume during operation, the duration of catheterization, hospitalization stay after operation were compared. [Results ] 41 cases of patients underwent laparoscopic radical prostatectomy were all successfully performed. No patient was converted to open surgery. The mean operating time of LRP group were （337.4±123.6） minutes. There was statistical difference between the RRT group which mean operating time was （182.4±81.8） minutes （P 〈0.05）. The mean bleeding volume during operation, the duration of catheterization,hospitalization stay after operation between LRP group and RRP group were （764.1±654.3） mL （P 〈0.05） and （1352.4±966.5） mL （P 〈 0.05）; （15.3±7.5） days and （24.1±8.9） days （P 〈0.05）, respectively, the incidence of complications in the observation group such as urine leakage, stoma stricture,uroelepsia and erection disfounction occurred were 34.15% （14/41）, the incidence of complications in the control group 34.78% （16/46）, There was no significant difference between the two groups. All patients were followed up 2~2.5 years. In the LRP group, The one-year biochemical recurrence rate was 7.32%, the two-year biochemical recurrence rate was 21.95%; the one-year continence rate was53.66%; the two- year continence rate was 76.09%; In the RRP group, The one-year biochemical recurrence rate was 8.70%, the two- year biochemical recurrence rate was 30.43%; the one-year continence rate was 52.17%; the two-year continence rate was 76.09%, There was no significant difference between the two groups. [ Conclusion] Laparoseopic radical prostatectomy not only perform less blood loss and faster recovery, but also play the similar functional results compared with open retropubie radical prostatectomy. So LRP should be promoted as a better treatment methods for localized prostate cancer.
出处
《中国内镜杂志》
CSCD
北大核心
2014年第2期133-136,共4页
China Journal of Endoscopy
