title: [Comparation of the transperitoneal and extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy].
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To compare the transperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy procedures with extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy procedures to assess for differences in outcomes and complications.
  
  
  METHODS
  A retrospective review 190 patients who had received laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer from June 2002 to January 2013. The results were compared between 116 transperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy procedures and 74 extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy procedures.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The cohorts were similar in terms of mean patient age, height, weight, body mass index, Gleason score from biopsy, and clinical stage. Patients receiced extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy had shorter operation time (146 minutes vs. 224 minutes, Z = -7.220, P = 0.000), less postoperative drainage time (3 days vs. 7 days, Z = -7.115, P = 0.000) and shorter postoperative length of hospital stay (5 days vs. 10 days, Z = -7.250, P = 0.000) than patients receiced transperitoneal procedures. However, the Gleason score, pathological stage, positive margin rate, intraoperative and early postoperative complications has no differences between the 2 groups (P > 0.05).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The patients who received extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy had shorter operative time and revovered faster recovery and the effect of surgery was similar.
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, the First Hospital of Peking University, Beijing 100034, China.
authors.forename: Zheng
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Zhao
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, the First Hospital of Peking University, Beijing 100034, China.
authors.forename: Yisen
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Meng
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, the First Hospital of Peking University, Beijing 100034, China.
authors.forename: Rui
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: He
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, the First Hospital of Peking University, Beijing 100034, China. Email: zhangqiangbmu@vip.sina.com.
authors.forename: Qian
authors.initials: Q
authors.lastname: Zhang
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, the First Hospital of Peking University, Beijing 100034, China.
authors.forename: Xuesong
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Li
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, the First Hospital of Peking University, Beijing 100034, China.
authors.forename: Cheng
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Zhan
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, the First Hospital of Peking University, Beijing 100034, China.
authors.forename: Yunxiang
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Xiao
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, the First Hospital of Peking University, Beijing 100034, China.
authors.forename: Xin
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Li
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, the First Hospital of Peking University, Beijing 100034, China.
authors.forename: Yi
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Song
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, the First Hospital of Peking University, Beijing 100034, China.
authors.forename: Liqun
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Zhou
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D006801:Humans; D010535:Laparoscopy / Q000379:methods*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D061646:Operative Time; D011183:Postoperative Complications; D011468:Prostatectomy / Q000379:methods*; D011471:Prostatic Neoplasms / Q000601:surgery*; D012189:Retrospective Studies