Contemporary Technique of Radical Prostatectomy

Laparoscopic Approach
  • Sidney C. Abreu
  • Andrew P. Steinberg
  • Inderbir S. Gill
Part of the Current Clinical Urology book series (CCU)


Once considered an unpopular operation with significant morbidity, radical retropubic prostatectomy has evolved into a refined, anatomically precise operation with satisfactory oncologic and functional outcomes (1). Recently, laparoscopy has been incorporated into the urologic armamentarium as an alternative technique for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) aims to simulate the open retropubic approach. Furthermore, owing to its enhanced visualization and magnification, the laparoscopic approach has the potential to impact favorably on the morbidity and functional sequelae related to this intricate operation.


Radical Prostatectomy Seminal Vesicle Bladder Neck Neurovascular Bundle Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Walsh PC, Donker PJ. Impotency following radical prostatectomy: insight into etiology and prevention. J Urol 1982; 128: 492–497.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schuessler WW, Kavoussi LR, Clayman RV, Vancaille T. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial case report. J Urol 1992; 147: 246A.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schluesser W, Shulman P, Clayman RV. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short-term experience. Urology 1997; 50: 854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Guillenneau B, Vallancien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Mountsouris technique. J Urol 2000; 163: 1643–1649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Raboy A, Ferzli G, Albert P. Initial experience with extraperitoneal endoscopic radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 1997; 50: 849–853.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bollens R, Bossche MV, Roumeguere T, et al. Extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2001; 40: 65–69.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Abreu S, Gill I, Kaouk J, et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: comparison of transperitoneal vs extraperitoneal approach. J Urol Suppl 2002; 167: 19.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rassweiler J, Sentker L, Seemann O, Hatzinger M, Rumpelt HJ. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with the Heilbronn technique: an analysis of the first 180 cases. J Urol 2001; 166: 2101–2108.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Steinberg A, Gill I. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Contemp Urol 2002; 14: 34–49.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gill S. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy. Urol Clin North Am 1998; 25: 343.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hoznek A, Salomon L, Rabii R, et al. Vesicourethral anastomosis during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the running suture method. J Endourol 2000; 14: 749–753.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nadu A, Salomon L, Hoznek A, et al. Early removal of the catheter after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2001; 166: 1662–1664.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Farouk A, Gill I, Kaouk J, et al. 150 laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP): learning curve in the United States. J Endourol 2002;16(suppl 1): A33, P9–2.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vallancien G, Cathelineau X, Baumert H, Doublet JD, Guillonneau B. Complications of transperitoneal laparoscopic surgery in urology: review of 1,311 procedures at a single center. J Urol 2002; 168: 23–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Walsh PC. Minimally invasive treatment of prostate cancer. J Endourol 2001; 15: 447–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Guillonneau B, El Fettouh H, Baumert HC. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncological midterm evaluation of 1000 patients at Montsouris Institute. J Endourol 2002;16(suppl 1): A36, P9–13.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Guillonneau B, Cathelineau X, Doublet JD, Vallancien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the lessons learned. J Endourol 2001; 15: 441–445.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Guillonneau B, Cathelineau X, Doublet JD, et al. Prospective assessment of functional results after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2001; 165 (suppl): 614A.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Katz R, Salomon L, Hoznek A. Patient reported sexual function following laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2002; 168: 2078–2082.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Salomon L, Olsson LE, Hoznek A, et al. Continence and potency after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol Suppl 2001; 165: 390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hoznek A, Salomon L, Olsson LE, et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2001; 40: 38–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Turk I, Serdar D, Winkelmann B, Schonberger B, Loening SA. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2001; 40: 46–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Susler T, Guillenneau B, Vallancien G, et al. Complications and initial experience with 1228 laparoscopic radical prostatectomy at 6 European centers. J Urol Suppl 2001; 165: 150.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Guillenneau B, Rozet F, Barret E, Cathelineau X, Vallencien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: assessment after 240 procedures. Urol Clin North Am 2001; 28: 189–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sidney C. Abreu
  • Andrew P. Steinberg
  • Inderbir S. Gill

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations