Transperitoneal or extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: does the approach matter?

: The greater accuracy of apical dissection and reconstruction in our first 100 patients undergoing transperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (TLRP) was not matched by a proportionate increase in the rate of return to normal continence compared with our prior open prostatectomy experience. We postulated that greater bladder dysfunction due to the almost total bladder dissection mandated by TLRP might be responsible and this might be rectified by the adoption of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy using an extraperitoneal approach (ELRP).

: A total of 100 patients undergoing TLRP were compared with 100 undergoing ELRP. The groups were subdivided into halves to investigate the influence of any learning curve effect. All patients had clinical stage T3aN0M0 or less prostate cancer and they were operated on by a single surgeon.

: Mean operative time (238.9 vs 190.6 minutes), blood loss (310.5 vs 201.5 ml), postoperative hospitalization (3.8 vs 2.6 nights) and catheterization duration (11.3 vs 10.1 days) were significantly greater in the TLRP group. After the first 50 cases were excluded in each group statistical significance persisted only for operative time (218.3 vs 184.2 minutes) and hospitalization (3.5 vs 2.5 nights). The pad-free rate was significantly lower 3 months following ELRP (80% vs 56%, p = 0.02). The overall 12-month pad-free rate for TLRP and ELRP was 90% and 96%, respectively. The overall 12-month erection rate for TLRP and ELRP was 61% and 82%, respectively.

: ELRP is superior to TLRP with respect to operative time, hospitalization and early continence.