Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/1/1604
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLouie-Johnsun, Mark-
dc.contributor.otherSpernat, D.-
dc.contributor.otherSofield, D.-
dc.contributor.otherMoon, D.-
dc.contributor.otherWoo, H.-
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-28T03:18:42Zen
dc.date.available2019-08-28T03:18:42Zen
dc.date.issued2014-03-
dc.identifier.citationVolume 2, Issue 1, pp. 8 - 11en
dc.identifier.issn2287-8882en
dc.identifier.urihttps://elibrary.cclhd.health.nsw.gov.au/cclhdjspui/handle/1/1604en
dc.description.abstractPURPOSE: There have been anecdotal reports of surgeons having to abandon radical prostatectomy (RP) after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR) due to obliteration of tissue planes by mesh. Nodal dissection may also be compromised. We prospectively collected data from four experienced prostate surgeons from separate institutions. Our objective was to evaluate the success rate of performing open RP (ORP), laparoscopic RP (LRP) and robotic assisted RP (RALRP) and pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) after LIHR, and the frequency of complications. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained databases of men who underwent RP after LIHR between 2004 and 2010 at four institutions was undertaken. The data recorded included age, preoperative prostate-specific antigen, preoperative Gleason score, and clinical stage. The operative approach, success or failure to perform RP, success or failure to perform PLND, pathological stage, and complications were also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 1,181 men underwent RP between 2004 and 2010. Fifty-seven patients (4.8%) underwent RP after LIHR. An ORP was attempted in 19 patients, LRP in 33, and RALRP in 5. All 57 cases were able to be successfully completed. Ten of the 18 open PLND were able to be completed (55.6%). Four of the 22 laparoscopic LND were able to be completed (18.2%). Robotic LND was possible in 5 of 5 cases (100%). Therefore, it was not possible to complete a LND 56.8% of patients. Complications were limited to ten patients. These complications included one LRP converted to ORP due to failure to progress, and one rectourethral fistula in a salvage procedure post failed high intensity focused ultrasound. CONCLUSIONS: LIHR is an increasingly common method of treating inguinal hernias. LIHR is not a contra-indication to RP. However PLND may not be possible in over 50% of patients who have had LIHR. Therefore, these patients may be under-staged and under treated.en
dc.description.sponsorshipUrologyen
dc.subjectSurgeryen
dc.titleImplications of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair on open, laparoscopic, and robotic radical prostatectomyen
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.identifier.doi10.12954/pi.13032en
dc.description.pubmedurihttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24693528en
dc.identifier.journaltitleProstate Internationalen
dc.relation.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-7645-2543en
dc.originaltypeTexten
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairetypeJournal Article-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
Appears in Collections:Health Service Research
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

22
checked on May 28, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.