Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Apical Dissection

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Robotic Urology

  • 1200 Accesses

Abstract

Prostate apex dissection during radical prostatectomy is a critical step in order to assure proper oncologic and functional outcomes. Full knowledge of the surgical anatomy of the prostate apex (shape variations, attachments to pelvic floor musculature, peri-prostatic fasciae, junction with membranous urethra, neural and vascular anatomy) is a prerequisite to achieve an effective surgical dissection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Coakley FV, et al. Urinary continence after radical retropubic prostatectomy: relationship with membranous urethral length on preoperative endorectal magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol. 2002;168(3):1032–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hammerer P, Huland H. Urodynamic evaluation of changes in urinary control after radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol. 1997;157(1):233–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Myers RP. Practical surgical anatomy for radical prostatectomy. Urol Clin North Am. 2001;28(3):473–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lee SE, et al. Impact of variations in prostatic apex shape on early recovery of urinary continence after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology. 2006;68(1):137–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Artibani W, Ficarra V, Guillonneau BD. Open to debate. The motion: a robot is needed to perform the best nerve sparing prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2007;52(1):275–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Artibani W, et al. Learning curve and preliminary experience with da Vinci-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Urol Int. 2008;80(3):237–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Artibani W, Novara G. Cancer-related outcome and learning curve in retropubic radical prostatectomy: “if you need an operation, the most important step is to choose the right surgeon”. Eur Urol. 2008;53(5):874–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ficarra V, et al. Evidence from robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review. Eur Urol. 2007;51(1):45–55; discussion 56.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Walz J, et al. A critical analysis of the current knowledge of surgical anatomy of the prostate related to optimisation of cancer control and preservation of continence and erection in candidates for radical prostatectomy: an update. Eur Urol. 2016;70(2):301–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Novara G, et al. Preoperative criteria to select patients for bilateral nerve-sparing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Sex Med. 2010;7(2 Pt 1):839–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Novara G, et al. Evaluating urinary continence and preoperative predictors of urinary continence after robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2010;184(3):1028–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Novara G, et al. Trifecta outcomes after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2011;107(1):100–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Novara G, et al. Prospective evaluation with standardised criteria for postoperative complications after robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2010;57(3):363–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ficarra V, et al. Predictors of positive surgical margins after laparoscopic robot assisted radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2009;182(6):2682–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ficarra V, et al. A prospective, non-randomized trial comparing robot-assisted laparoscopic and retropubic radical prostatectomy in one European institution. BJU Int. 2009;104(4):534–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ficarra V, et al. Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol. 2009;55(5):1037–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata, University of Verona, Polo Chirurgico “P. Confortini”—5th floor, Piazzale S. Stefani 1, 37100, Verona, Italy

    Walter Artibani M.D. & Giovanni Cacciamani

Authors
  1. Walter Artibani M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Giovanni Cacciamani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Walter Artibani M.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Kantonsspital Winterthur, Winterthur, Switzerland

    Hubert John

  2. Department of Urology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden

    Peter Wiklund

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Artibani, W., Cacciamani, G. (2018). The Apical Dissection. In: John, H., Wiklund, P. (eds) Robotic Urology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65864-3_31

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65864-3_31

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-65863-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-65864-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation