The incidence of bleeding during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy has been reported to range between 1% and 7.6%. Postoperative bleeding complications have been encountered in 0.7% of endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy cases and require endoscopic or open re-intervention. Thus, bleeding complications represent a significant factor of intra- and postoperative morbidity. We review our experience with endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy, and we propose methods to prevent and manage intraoperative bleeding complications. In addition, special technical considerations regarding the nerve-sparing procedures are presented.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
StolzenburgJU, RabenaltR, DoM, KallidonisP, LiatsikosEN. Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy: The University of Leipzig experience of 2000 cases. J Endourol, 2008; 22:2319–2325.
2.
StolzenburgJU, RabenaltR, DoM, TannapfelA, TrussMC, LiatsikosEN. Nerve-sparing endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy: University of Leipzig technique. J Endourol, 2006; 20:925–929.
3.
StolzenburgJU, LiatsikosEN, RabenaltRet al.Nerve sparing endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy—effect of puboprostatic ligament preservation on early continence and positive surgical margins. Eur Urol, 2006; 49:103–112.
LiatsikosE, RabenaltR, BurchardtMet al.Prevention and management of perioperative complications in laparoscopic and endoscopic radical prostatectomy. World J Urol, 2006; 24:668–675.
MatsunagaGS, AhleringTE, SkareckyDW. Update on laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Sci World J, 2006; 6:2542–2552.
11.
AhleringTE, EichelL, ChouD, SkareckyD. Feasibility study for robotic radical prostatectomy cautery-free neurovascular bundle preservation. Urology, 2005; 65:994–997.
12.
RemziM, KlinglerHC, TinzlMV, FongYK, LoddeM, KissB, MarbergerM. Morbidity of laparoscopic extraperitoneal versus transperitoneal radical prostatectomy versus open retropubic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2005; 48:83–89.
13.
RassweilerJ, HruzaM, TeberD, SuL-M. Laparoscopic and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy—critical analysis of the results. Eur Urol, 2006; 49:612–624.
14.
MartinaGR, GiumelliP, ScuzzarellaS, RemottiM, CarusoG, LovisoloJ. Laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy—learning curve of a laparoscopy-naive urologist in a community hospital. Urology, 2005; 65:959–963.
15.
HoznekA, AntiphonP, BorkowskiTet al.Assessment of surgical technique and perioperative morbidity associated with extraperitoneal versus transperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Urology, 2003; 61:617–622.
16.
Van VelthovenRF. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal approach: Is there an advantage for the patient?Curr Opin Urol, 2005; 15:83–88.
17.
ErdogruT, TeberD, FredeT, MarreroR, HammadyA, SeemannO, RassweilerJ. Comparison of transperitoneal radical prostatectomy using Match-Pair analysis. Eur Urol, 2004; 46:312–320.
18.
PoulakisV, WitsschU, VriesR, DillenburgW, BechtE. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in men older than 70 years of age with localized prostate cancer: Comparison of morbidity, recovalescence and short-term clinical outcomes between younger and older men. Eur Urol, 2007; 51:1341–1349.
19.
GalliS, SimonatoA, BozzolaA, GregoriA, LissianiA, ScaburriA, GaboardiF. Oncologic outcome and continence recovery after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: 3 years' follow-up in a “second generation center.”Eur Urol, 2006; 49:859–865.
20.
RassweilerJ, SentkerL, SeemannO, HatzingerM, StockC, FredeT. Heilbronn laparoscopic radical prostatectomy technique and results after 100 cases. Eur Urol, 2001; 40:54–64.
