A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

[Clinical and morphological assessment of the results of a standard robot-assisted nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy and with the use of Retzius-sparing technique]. | LitMetric

Objective: To compare the perioperative, functional, clinical and morphological results of a standard robot-assisted nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy and with the use of the Retzius-sparing technique.

Materials And Methods: A prospective analysis was performed of two groups of patients (n=54) who underwent nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (period from 2017 to 2018). The first group included 29 patients who underwent nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with Retzius-sparing technique, the second - 25 patients operated on according to the standard method of bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. All patients were comparable in baseline characteristics. In all cases, patients had histologically verified localized prostate cancer pT2a-2c.

Results: In cases with use Retzius-sparing technique there is no statistically significant difference in the operation time (243.60 min vs 236.64 min, in groups 1 and 2, p>0.05) and intraoperative blood loss (131.20 ml vs 122.57 ml , in groups 1 and 2, p>0.05). Regarding the dynamics of the urinary continence recovery, the Retzius-sparing technique demonstrates advantages in speed and frequency at all follow-up periods (54.13% vs 41.81%; 68.12% vs 59.21%; 94.15% vs 90 , 63%; 98.54% vs 97.12%; 98.62% vs 97.31%; 98.83% vs 97.82% - in one week after removal of the urethral catheter, 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months in the first and second group, respectively). The frequency of erectile function recovery after 12 months was 82.17% and 71.14% in the first and second groups, respectively.

Conclusions: Retzius-sparing robot-assisted prostatectomy superior to standard operation in the speed and timing of recovery of urine continence and erectile function.

Download full-text PDF

Source

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

radical prostatectomy
20
nerve-sparing radical
12
prostatectomy retzius-sparing
12
retzius-sparing technique
12
standard robot-assisted
8
robot-assisted nerve-sparing
8
underwent nerve-sparing
8
nerve-sparing robot-assisted
8
robot-assisted radical
8
groups p>005
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!