| Summary: | Prostate cancer is the second most prevalent cancer among men and is the
6th cancer type leading to death. Starting with the use of PSA screening,
there has been a steep increase in the number of cases diagnosed with and
treated for localized prostate cancer. Radical prostatectomy use has increased
following the increase in the number of cases and has become the golden
standard for surgical procedures for their treatment. For over 50 years, while
open retropubic and perineal methods have been used separately, advantages
and disadvantages of each method have been expressed in official and
unofficial grounds. The use of nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy that
began particularly after the clearer definition of the neurovascular bundles
and the anatomy of the prostate by Walsh and the improvements in
continence and potency has proved open radical retropubic prostatectomy
(RRP) more advantageous. The da Vinci Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical,
Sunnyvale, CA, USA), developed to qualify disadvantages of laparoscopy in
radical prostatectomy, came into use in 2000. With Abbou’s identification of
first robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), it finds increasing areas
of application. Still there is need for further comparison of especially the
three methods (RPP, RRP, and RARP) in prostate cancer treatment with more
patients and longer follow-up periods. The objective of the first part of this
paper is to provide a brief comparison of RRP and RARP results and in the
second part we will discuss the perineal radical prostatectomy
|
|---|
