Intra- and early postoperative complications of laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

Abstract

Radical prostatectomy is the gold standard for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. In the last decade, new surgical technologies have been actively implemented that certainly increases the efficiency of oncourological treatment. The rate of intra- and postoperative complications of radical prostatectomy yet remains quite high. In this regard, crucial tasks of modern urology are minimizing of their number and effective treatment. In the review article, intra- and early postoperative complications of laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy have been considered.

Keywords

radical prostatectomy / complications / lymphocele / anastomotic leakage / pelvic lymph node dissection

References

[1] Pernar CH, Ebot EM, Wilson KM, Mucci LA. The epidemiology of prostate cancer. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2018;8(12): a030361. doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a030361

[2] Pernar C.H., Ebot E.M., Wilson K.M., Mucci L.A. The epidemiology of prostate cancer // Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2018. Vol. 8, N 12. ID a030361. doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a030361

[3] Pernar CH, Ebot EM, Wilson KM, Mucci LA. The epidemiology of prostate cancer. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2018;8(12): a030361. doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a030361

[4] Kaprina AD, Starinsky BB, Petrova GV, editors. Malignant neoplasms in Russia in 2017 (morbidity and mortality). Moscow; P.A. Herzen Moscow Research Institute of Oncology; 2018. 250 p. (In Russ.)

[5] Злокачественные новообразования в России в 2017 году (заболеваемость и смертность) / под ред. А.Д. Каприна, В.В. Старинского, Г.В. Петровой. Москва: МНИОИ им. П.А. Герцена, 2018. 250 c.

[6] Kaprina AD, Starinsky BB, Petrova GV, editors. Malignant neoplasms in Russia in 2017 (morbidity and mortality). Moscow; P.A. Herzen Moscow Research Institute of Oncology; 2018. 250 p. (In Russ.)

[7] Schuessler WW, Schulam PG, Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short-term experience. Urology. 1997;50(6):854–857. doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00543-8

[8] Schuessler W.W., Schulam P.G., Clayman R.V., Kavoussi L.R. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short-term experience // Urology. 1997. Vol. 50, N 6. P. 854–857. doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00543-8

[9] Schuessler WW, Schulam PG, Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short-term experience. Urology. 1997;50(6):854–857. doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00543-8

[10] Binder J, Kramer W. Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2001;87(4):408–410. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2001.00115.x

[11] Binder J., Kramer W. Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy // BJU Int. 2001. Vol. 87, N 4. P. 408–410. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2001.00115.x

[12] Binder J, Kramer W. Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2001;87(4):408–410. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2001.00115.x

[13] Martínez-Holguín E, Herranz-Amo F, Hernández-Cavieres J, et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy compared to open radical prostatectomy: Comparison between surgical time, complications and length of hospital stay. Actas Urol Esp (Engl Ed). 2020;44(1):41–48. doi: 10.1016/j.acuro.2019.06.008

[14] Martínez-Holguín E., Herranz-Amo F., Hernández-Cavieres J., et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy compared to open radical prostatectomy: Comparison between surgical time, complications and length of hospital stay // Actas Urol Esp (Engl Ed). 2020. Vol. 44, N 1. P. 41–48. doi: 10.1016/j.acuro.2019.06.008

[15] Martínez-Holguín E, Herranz-Amo F, Hernández-Cavieres J, et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy compared to open radical prostatectomy: Comparison between surgical time, complications and length of hospital stay. Actas Urol Esp (Engl Ed). 2020;44(1):41–48. doi: 10.1016/j.acuro.2019.06.008

[16] Sujenthiran A, Nossiter J, Parry M, et al. National cohort study comparing severe medium-term urinary complications after robot-assisted vs laparoscopic vs retropubic open radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2018;121(3):445–452. doi: 10.1111/bju.14054

[17] Sujenthiran A., Nossiter J., Parry M., et al. National cohort study comparing severe medium-term urinary complications after robot-assisted vs laparoscopic vs retropubic open radical prostatectomy // BJU Int. 2018. Vol. 121, N 3. P. 445–452. doi: 10.1111/bju.14054

[18] Sujenthiran A, Nossiter J, Parry M, et al. National cohort study comparing severe medium-term urinary complications after robot-assisted vs laparoscopic vs retropubic open radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2018;121(3):445–452. doi: 10.1111/bju.14054

[19] Ryabov MA, Byadretdinov IS, Kotov SV. Robot-assisted and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy learning curve. Experimental and Clinical Urology. 2021;14(4):37–43. EDN: THLXDC doi: 10.29188/2222-8543-2021-14-4-37-43

[20] Рябов М.А., Бядретдинов И.Ш., Котов С.В. Кривая обучения лапароскопической и робот-ассистированной радикальной простатэктомии // Экспериментальная и клиническая урология. 2021. Т. 14, № 4. С. 37–43. EDN: THLXDC doi: 10.29188/2222-8543-2021-14-4-37-43

[21] Ryabov MA, Byadretdinov IS, Kotov SV. Robot-assisted and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy learning curve. Experimental and Clinical Urology. 2021;14(4):37–43. EDN: THLXDC doi: 10.29188/2222-8543-2021-14-4-37-43

[22] Hasson HM. A modified instrument and method for laparoscopy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1971;110(6):886–887. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(71)90593-x

[23] Hasson H.M. A modified instrument and method for laparoscopy // Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1971. Vol. 110, N 6. P. 886–887. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(71)90593-x

[24] Hasson HM. A modified instrument and method for laparoscopy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1971;110(6):886–887. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(71)90593-x

[25] Hasson HM. Open laparoscopy vs. closed laparoscopy: a comparison of complication rates. Adv Plan Parent. 1978;13(3–4):41–50.

[26] Hasson H.M. Open laparoscopy vs. closed laparoscopy: a comparison of complication rates // Adv Plan Parent. 1978. Vol. 13, N 3–4. P. 41–50.

[27] Hasson HM. Open laparoscopy vs. closed laparoscopy: a comparison of complication rates. Adv Plan Parent. 1978;13(3–4):41–50.

[28] Schäfer M, Lauper M, Krähenbühl L. Trocar and Veress needle injuries during laparoscopy. Surg Endosc. 2001;15(3):275–280. doi: 10.1007/s004640000337

[29] Schäfer M., Lauper M., Krähenbühl L. Trocar and Veress needle injuries during laparoscopy // Surg Endosc. 2001. Vol. 15, N 3. P. 275–280. doi: 10.1007/s004640000337

[30] Schäfer M, Lauper M, Krähenbühl L. Trocar and Veress needle injuries during laparoscopy. Surg Endosc. 2001;15(3):275–280. doi: 10.1007/s004640000337

[31] Catarci M, Carlini M, Gentileschi P, Santoro E. Major and minor injuries during the creation of pneumoperitoneum. A multicenter study on 12,919 cases. Surg Endosc. 2001;15(6):566–569. doi: 10.1007/s004640000381

[32] Catarci M., Carlini M., Gentileschi P., Santoro E. Major and minor injuries during the creation of pneumoperitoneum. A multicenter study on 12,919 cases // Surg Endosc. 2001. Vol. 15, N 6. P. 566–569. doi: 10.1007/s004640000381

[33] Catarci M, Carlini M, Gentileschi P, Santoro E. Major and minor injuries during the creation of pneumoperitoneum. A multicenter study on 12,919 cases. Surg Endosc. 2001;15(6):566–569. doi: 10.1007/s004640000381

[34] Stolzenburg J-U, Rabenalt R, Do M, et al. Complications of endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE): prevention and management. World J Urol. 2006;24(6):668–675. doi: 10.1007/s00345-006-0133-8

[35] Stolzenburg J.-U., Rabenalt R., Do M., et al. Complications of endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE): prevention and management // World J Urol. 2006. Vol. 24, N 6. P. 668–675. doi: 10.1007/s00345-006-0133-8

[36] Stolzenburg J-U, Rabenalt R, Do M, et al. Complications of endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE): prevention and management. World J Urol. 2006;24(6):668–675. doi: 10.1007/s00345-006-0133-8

[37] Haeuser L, Reese SW, Paciotti M, et al. surgical complications requiring intervention in open versus minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. Urol Int. 2022;106(1):51–55. doi: 10.1159/000515618

[38] Haeuser L., Reese S.W., Paciotti M., et al. surgical complications requiring intervention in open versus minimally invasive radical prostatectomy // Urol Int. 2022. Vol. 106, N 1. P. 51–55. doi: 10.1159/000515618

[39] Haeuser L, Reese SW, Paciotti M, et al. surgical complications requiring intervention in open versus minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. Urol Int. 2022;106(1):51–55. doi: 10.1159/000515618

[40] Novara G, Ficarra V, Rosen RC, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2012;62(3):431–452. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.044

[41] Novara G., Ficarra V., Rosen R.C., et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy // Eur Urol. 2012. Vol. 62, N 3. P. 431–452. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.044

[42] Novara G, Ficarra V, Rosen RC, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2012;62(3):431–452. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.044

[43] Ploussard G, Briganti A, de la Taille A, et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: efficacy, limitations, and complications — a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2014;65(1):7–16. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.057

[44] Ploussard G., Briganti A., de la Taille A., et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: efficacy, limitations, and complications — a systematic review of the literature // Eur Urol. 2014. Vol. 65, N 1. P. 7–16. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.057

[45] Ploussard G, Briganti A, de la Taille A, et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: efficacy, limitations, and complications — a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2014;65(1):7–16. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.057

[46] Fossati N, Willemse P-PM, Van den Broeck T, et al. The benefits and harms of different extents of lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: A systematic review. Eur Urol. 2017;72(1):84–109. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.12.003

[47] Fossati N., Willemse P.-P.M., Van den Broeck T., et al. The benefits and harms of different extents of lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: A systematic review // Eur Urol. 2017. Vol. 72, N 1. P. 84–109. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.12.003

[48] Fossati N, Willemse P-PM, Van den Broeck T, et al. The benefits and harms of different extents of lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: A systematic review. Eur Urol. 2017;72(1):84–109. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.12.003

[49] Davis JW, Shah JB, Achim M. Robot-assisted extended pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) at the time of radical prostatectomy (RP): a video-based illustration of technique, results, and unmet patient selection needs. BJU Int. 2011;108(6b):993–998. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10454.x

[50] Davis J.W., Shah J.B., Achim M. Robot-assisted extended pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) at the time of radical prostatectomy (RP): a video-based illustration of technique, results, and unmet patient selection needs // BJU Int. 2011. Vol. 108, N 6b. P. 993–998. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10454.x

[51] Davis JW, Shah JB, Achim M. Robot-assisted extended pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) at the time of radical prostatectomy (RP): a video-based illustration of technique, results, and unmet patient selection needs. BJU Int. 2011;108(6b):993–998. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10454.x

[52] Lestingi JFP, Guglielmetti GB, Trinh Q-D, et al. Extended versus limited pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer: early oncological outcomes from a randomized phase 3 trial. Eur Urol. 2021;79(5): 595–604. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.11.040

[53] Lestingi J.F.P., Guglielmetti G.B., Trinh Q.-D., et al. Extended versus limited pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer: early oncological outcomes from a randomized phase 3 trial // Eur Urol. 2021. Vol. 79, N 5. P. 595–604. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.11.040

[54] Lestingi JFP, Guglielmetti GB, Trinh Q-D, et al. Extended versus limited pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer: early oncological outcomes from a randomized phase 3 trial. Eur Urol. 2021;79(5): 595–604. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.11.040

[55] Touijer KA, Sjoberg DD, Benfante N, et al. Limited versus extended pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: A randomized clinical trial. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021;4(4):532–539. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.03.006

[56] Touijer K.A., Sjoberg D.D., Benfante N., et al. Limited versus extended pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: A randomized clinical trial // Eur Urol Oncol. 2021. Vol. 4, N 4. P. 532–539. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.03.006

[57] Touijer KA, Sjoberg DD, Benfante N, et al. Limited versus extended pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: A randomized clinical trial. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021;4(4):532–539. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.03.006

[58] Jhaveri JK, Penna FJ, Diaz-Insua M, et al. Ureteral injuries sustained during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2014;28(3):318–324. doi: 10.1089/end.2013.0564

[59] Jhaveri J.K., Penna F.J., Diaz-Insua M., et al. Ureteral injuries sustained during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy // J Endourol. 2014. Vol. 28, N 3. P. 318–324. doi: 10.1089/end.2013.0564

[60] Jhaveri JK, Penna FJ, Diaz-Insua M, et al. Ureteral injuries sustained during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2014;28(3):318–324. doi: 10.1089/end.2013.0564

[61] Gözen AS, Aktoz T, Akin Y, et al. Is it possible to draw a risk map for obturator nerve injury during pelvic lymph node dissection? The heilbronn experience and a review of the literature. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2015;25(10):826–832. doi: 10.1089/lap.2015.0190

[62] Gözen A.S., Aktoz T., Akin Y., et al. Is it possible to draw a risk map for obturator nerve injury during pelvic lymph node dissection? The heilbronn experience and a review of the literature // J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2015. Vol. 25, N 10. P. 826–832. doi: 10.1089/lap.2015.0190

[63] Gözen AS, Aktoz T, Akin Y, et al. Is it possible to draw a risk map for obturator nerve injury during pelvic lymph node dissection? The heilbronn experience and a review of the literature. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2015;25(10):826–832. doi: 10.1089/lap.2015.0190

[64] Rassweiler J, Hruza M, Teber D, Su L-M. Laparoscopic and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy — critical analysis of the results. Eur Urol. 2006;49(4):612–624. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.12.054

[65] Rassweiler J., Hruza M., Teber D., Su L.-M. Laparoscopic and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy — critical analysis of the results // Eur Urol. 2006. Vol. 49, N 4. P. 612–624. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.12.054

[66] Rassweiler J, Hruza M, Teber D, Su L-M. Laparoscopic and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy — critical analysis of the results. Eur Urol. 2006;49(4):612–624. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.12.054

[67] La Riva A, Sayegh AS, Perez LC, et al. Obturator nerve injury in robotic pelvic surgery: scenarios and management strategies. Eur Urol. 2023;83(4):361–368. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.12.034

[68] La Riva A., Sayegh A.S., Perez L.C., et al. Obturator nerve injury in robotic pelvic surgery: scenarios and management strategies // Eur Urol. 2023. Vol. 83, N 4. P. 361–368. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.12.034

[69] La Riva A, Sayegh AS, Perez LC, et al. Obturator nerve injury in robotic pelvic surgery: scenarios and management strategies. Eur Urol. 2023;83(4):361–368. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.12.034

[70] Froehner M, Novotny V, Koch R, et al. Perioperative complications after radical prostatectomy: open versus robot-assisted laparoscopic approach. Urol Int. 2013;90(3):312–315. doi: 10.1159/000345323

[71] Froehner M., Novotny V., Koch R., et al. Perioperative complications after radical prostatectomy: open versus robot-assisted laparoscopic approach // Urol Int. 2013. Vol. 90, N 3. P. 312–315. doi: 10.1159/000345323

[72] Froehner M, Novotny V, Koch R, et al. Perioperative complications after radical prostatectomy: open versus robot-assisted laparoscopic approach. Urol Int. 2013;90(3):312–315. doi: 10.1159/000345323

[73] Murphy DG, Bjartell A, Ficarra V, et al. Downsides of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: limitations and complications. Eur Urol. 2010;57(5):735–746. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.12.021

[74] Murphy D.G., Bjartell A., Ficarra V., et al. Downsides of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: limitations and complications // Eur Urol. 2010. Vol. 57, N 5. P. 735–746. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.12.021

[75] Murphy DG, Bjartell A, Ficarra V, et al. Downsides of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: limitations and complications. Eur Urol. 2010;57(5):735–746. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.12.021

[76] Lei Y, Alemozaffar M, Williams SB, et al. Athermal division and selective suture ligation of the dorsal vein complex during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of technique and outcomes. Eur Urol. 2011;59(2):235–243. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.08.043

[77] Lei Y., Alemozaffar M., Williams S.B., et al. Athermal division and selective suture ligation of the dorsal vein complex during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of technique and outcomes // Eur Urol. 2011. Vol. 59, N 2. P. 235–243. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.08.043

[78] Lei Y, Alemozaffar M, Williams SB, et al. Athermal division and selective suture ligation of the dorsal vein complex during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of technique and outcomes. Eur Urol. 2011;59(2):235–243. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.08.043

[79] Li H, Liu C, Zhang H, et al. The use of unidirectional barbed suture for urethrovesical anastomosis during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety. PLoS One. 2015;10(7):e0131167. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131167

[80] Li H., Liu C., Zhang H., et al. The use of unidirectional barbed suture for urethrovesical anastomosis during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety // PLoS One. 2015. Vol. 10, N 7. ID e0131167. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131167

[81] Li H, Liu C, Zhang H, et al. The use of unidirectional barbed suture for urethrovesical anastomosis during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety. PLoS One. 2015;10(7):e0131167. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131167

[82] Kowalewski KF, Tapking C, Hetjens S, et al. Interrupted versus continuous suturing for vesicourethral anastomosis during radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus. 2019;5(6):980–991. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2018.05.009

[83] Kowalewski K.F., Tapking C., Hetjens S., et al. Interrupted versus continuous suturing for vesicourethral anastomosis during radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis // Eur Urol Focus. 2019. Vol. 5, N 6. P. 980–991. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2018.05.009

[84] Kowalewski KF, Tapking C, Hetjens S, et al. Interrupted versus continuous suturing for vesicourethral anastomosis during radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus. 2019;5(6):980–991. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2018.05.009

[85] Matsuyama H, Matsumoto H, Nagao K, et al. Running suture versus interrupted suture for vesicourethral anastomosis in retropubic radical prostatectomy: a randomized study. Int J Urol. 2015;22(3):271–277. doi: 10.1111/iju.12667

[86] Matsuyama H., Matsumoto H., Nagao K., et al. Running suture versus interrupted suture for vesicourethral anastomosis in retropubic radical prostatectomy: a randomized study // Int J Urol. 2015. Vol. 22, N 3. P. 271–277. doi: 10.1111/iju.12667

[87] Matsuyama H, Matsumoto H, Nagao K, et al. Running suture versus interrupted suture for vesicourethral anastomosis in retropubic radical prostatectomy: a randomized study. Int J Urol. 2015;22(3):271–277. doi: 10.1111/iju.12667

[88] Al-Shukri SK, Nevirovich ES, Kuzmin IV, Boriskin AG. Early and late complications of radical prostatectomy. Urology reports (St. Petersburg). 2012;2(2):10–14. EDN: PZHTET doi: 10.17816/uroved2210-14

[89] Аль-Шукри С.Х., Невирович Е.С., Кузьмин И.В., Борискин А.Г. Ранние и поздние осложнения радикальной простатэктомии // Урологические ведомости. 2012. Т. 2, № 2. C. 10–14. EDN: PZHTET doi: 10.17816/uroved2210-14

[90] Al-Shukri SK, Nevirovich ES, Kuzmin IV, Boriskin AG. Early and late complications of radical prostatectomy. Urology reports (St. Petersburg). 2012;2(2):10–14. EDN: PZHTET doi: 10.17816/uroved2210-14

[91] Pompe RS, Beyer B, Haese A, et al. Postoperative complications of contemporary open and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy using standardised reporting systems. BJU Int. 2018;122(5):801–807. doi: 10.1111/bju.14369

[92] Pompe R.S., Beyer B., Haese A., et al. Postoperative complications of contemporary open and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy using standardised reporting systems // BJU Int. 2018. Vol. 122, N 5. P. 801–807. doi: 10.1111/bju.14369

[93] Pompe RS, Beyer B, Haese A, et al. Postoperative complications of contemporary open and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy using standardised reporting systems. BJU Int. 2018;122(5):801–807. doi: 10.1111/bju.14369

[94] Tillier C, van Muilekom HAM, Bloos-van der Hulst J, et al. Vesico-urethral anastomosis (VUA) evaluation of short- and long-term outcome after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP): selective cystogram to improve outcome. J Robot Surg. 2017;11(4):441–446. doi: 10.1007/s11701-017-0677-1

[95] Tillier C., van Muilekom H.A.M., Bloos-van der Hulst J., et al. Vesico-urethral anastomosis (VUA) evaluation of short- and long-term outcome after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP): selective cystogram to improve outcome // J Robot Surg. 2017. Vol. 11, N 4. P. 441–446. doi: 10.1007/s11701-017-0677-1

[96] Tillier C, van Muilekom HAM, Bloos-van der Hulst J, et al. Vesico-urethral anastomosis (VUA) evaluation of short- and long-term outcome after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP): selective cystogram to improve outcome. J Robot Surg. 2017;11(4):441–446. doi: 10.1007/s11701-017-0677-1

[97] Motterle G, Morlacco A, Zanovello N, et al. Surgical strategies for lymphocele prevention in minimally invasive radical prostatectomy and lymph node dissection: A systematic review. J Endourol. 2020;34(2):113–120. doi: 10.1089/end.2019.0716

[98] Motterle G., Morlacco A., Zanovello N., et al. Surgical strategies for lymphocele prevention in minimally invasive radical prostatectomy and lymph node dissection: A systematic review // J Endourol. 2020. Vol. 34, N 2. P. 113–120. doi: 10.1089/end.2019.0716

[99] Motterle G, Morlacco A, Zanovello N, et al. Surgical strategies for lymphocele prevention in minimally invasive radical prostatectomy and lymph node dissection: A systematic review. J Endourol. 2020;34(2):113–120. doi: 10.1089/end.2019.0716

[100] Cacciamani GE, Maas M, Nassiri N, et al. Impact of pelvic lymph node dissection and its extent on perioperative morbidity in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021;4(2):134–149. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.02.00

[101] Cacciamani G.E., Maas M., Nassiri N., et al. Impact of pelvic lymph node dissection and its extent on perioperative morbidity in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis // Eur Urol Oncol. 2021. Vol. 4, N 2. P. 134–149. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.02.001

[102] Cacciamani GE, Maas M, Nassiri N, et al. Impact of pelvic lymph node dissection and its extent on perioperative morbidity in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021;4(2):134–149. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.02.00

[103] Tsaur I, Thomas C. Risk factors, complications and management of lymphocele formation after radical prostatectomy: A mini-review. Int J Urol. 2019;26(7):711–716. doi: 10.1111/iju.13964

[104] Tsaur I., Thomas C. Risk factors, complications and management of lymphocele formation after radical prostatectomy: A mini-review // Int J Urol. 2019. Vol. 26, N 7. P. 711–716. doi: 10.1111/iju.13964

[105] Tsaur I, Thomas C. Risk factors, complications and management of lymphocele formation after radical prostatectomy: A mini-review. Int J Urol. 2019;26(7):711–716. doi: 10.1111/iju.13964

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Eco-Vector