Evidence Hub

Laparoscopic prostate-sparing radical cystectomy: the Montsouris technique and preliminary results

Arroyo C, Andrews H, Rozet F, Cathelineau X, Vallancien G

Journal of endourology, 2005

25 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Prostate-sparing radical cystectomy has been described in the literature and has proven to be a promising procedure because of the continence and erectile function results which does not necessarily compromise the oncologic outcome in properly selected patients. We report our preliminary results with this technique performed laparoscopically.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 25 patients with an average age of 60 years have undergone this procedure. Through a transperitoneal approach, lymph-node dissection is done with frozen-section examination, and the ureters are ligated and biopsied. The seminal vesicles are dissected, followed by complete mobilization of the bladder. Next the bladder neck is incised followed by the bladder-pedicle dissection. A simple prostatectomy can be performed if required. Finally, the neobladder is reconstructed via a small infraumbilical incision that also permits extraction of the surgical specimen. The neobladder is anastomosed to the prostate capsule.

RESULTS: The average surgical time was 285 minutes and the mean blood loss 640 mL. The complications encountered (4) were: one case each of bowel incarceration, urinary leak, lymphocele, and port-site hernia. All but one of the patients are alive at 9-month follow-up, with the one patient dying of cancer progression. No patient presented with daytime incontinence, although seven reported nocturia. There were 20 patients who maintained their preoperative sexual potency, and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 25 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free