Gastón Ochoa-León, Departamento de Urología, Hospital Real San Jose Valle Real, Zapopan, Jalisco, Mexico
Javier Olivares-Rivera, Departamento de Urología, Hospital Real San Jose Valle Real, Zapopan, Jalisco, Mexico
Julián Sayeg-Lozano, Departamento de Urología, Hospital Real San Jose Valle Real, Zapopan, Jalisco, Mexico
Esteban Gastélum-Rivera, Departamento de Urología, Hospital Real San Jose Valle Real, Zapopan, Jalisco, Mexico
Mario Ochoa-Vega, Departamento de Urología, Hospital Real San Jose Valle Real, Zapopan, Jalisco, Mexico
Adrián Ramírez-de-Arellano, Departamento de Microbiología y Patología, Instituto de Investigación en Cáncer e Infecciones, Centro Universitario de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad de Guadalajara, Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico
Erick Sierra-Díaz, Epidemiology Division, Unidad Médica de Alta Especialidad, Hospital de Especialidades, Centro Médico Nacional de Occidente, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Guadalajara, Jalisco, México
Introduction: The Retzius-sparing (RS) technique for radical prostatectomy has demonstrated early functional advantages, particularly in the recovery of urinary continence, without compromising oncological outcomes. However, most of the evidence comes from robot-assisted procedures, and there is limited information on its application through laparoscopic surgery. The present study aims to evaluate the functional and oncological outcomes in localized prostate cancer patients treated with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with RS approach (PRL-RS) and compared with PRL-RS posterior reconstruction. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed in Jalisco, Mexico. Localized postage cancer patients were the main inclusion criteria. Al patients were managed by a single surgeon using two surgical techniques. Central tendency measures were used to describe groups and to compare means, t-test, and Mann-Whitney U-test were used. Results: A total of 122 patients were included in the study. The first 39 patients were managed with RS approach. The last 83 patients were managed with the same technique plus posterior reconstruction. Some issues like surgery time and continence after surgery had relevant results after 1 week (54 vs. 34%); meanwhile, other points like sexual potency had not significant differences. Conclusion: Posterior reconstruction added to the RS approach showed better results in patients with localized prostate cancer managed with laparoscopic surgery. Although time might be some minutes longer, the benefits with regard to continence offered better results without compromising oncological outcomes.
Keywords: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Retzius-sparing. Prostate cancer. Continence. Posterior reconstruction.
