62 / 94
62
Ces Urol 2015; 19(1): 56–63
ORIGINÁLNÍ PRÁCE
metoda, otevřená RP je standardní metoda. Obě
metody jsou plně hodnotné, alternativní metody
pro léčbu lokálního karcinomu prostaty. LRP je
zatížena delším operačním časem, naproti tomu
kratší pooperační hospitalizací. Obě metody mají
obdobné funkční a onkologické výsledky.
LITERATURA
1. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA.
Classification of surgical complications. Ann Surg 2004; 240(2):
205–213.
2. Clavien PA, Barkun J, Oliveira ML, et al.
The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: Five
year Experience. Ann Surg 2009; 250(2): 187–196.
3. Morgan M, Smith N, Thomas K, Murphy DG.
Is Clavien the new standard for reporting urologic com-
plications? BJU International 2009; 104: 434–436.
4. Yao XD, Liu XJ, Zhang SL, Dai B, Zhang HL, Ye DW.
Perioperative complications of radica retropubic
prostatectomy in patiens with locally advanced prostate cancer: a comparison with clinmically localised
prostate cancer. Asian J Androl 2013; 15(2): 241–245.
5. Hsu EI, et al.
Influence of body weight and prostate volum on intraoperative, perioperative and posto-
parative outcomes after radiál retropubic propstatectomy. Urology 2003; 61(3): 601–606.
6. Gacci M, Sebastianelli A, Salvi M, et al.
Role of abdominal obesity for functional outcomes and
complications in men treated with radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: results of theMulticenter
Italian Report on Radical Prostatectomy (MIRROR) study. Scand J Urol 2014; 48(2): 138–145.
7. Caras RJ, Lustik MB, Kern SQ, Sterbis JR, McMann LP.
Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy demonstrates
less morbidity than open radical prostatectomy: ananalysis of the American College of Surgeons National
Surgical Quality Improvement Program diabase with a focus on surgical trainee involement. J Endourol
2014; 28(3): 298–305.
8. Gonzalgo ML, Pavlovich CP, Trock BJ, et al.
Classification and trends of periopoerative morbidities
following laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2005; 174: 135–139.
9. Rabbani F, Yunis LH, Pinochet R, et al.
Comprehensive standardized report of complications of retro-
pubic radiál prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2010; 57(3): 391–394.
10. Lopenberg B, Noldus J, Holz A, Paliksaar RJ.
Reporting complikations after open radical retropubic
prostatectřomy using the Martin kriteria. J Urol 2010; 184(3): 829–830.
11. Stolzenburg JU, Truss MC, Bekos A, Do M, Rabenalt R, et al.
Does the extraperitoneal laparoscopic
approach improve the outcome of radical prostatectomy? Curr Urol Rep 2004; 5: 115–122.
12. Hiess M, Ponholzer A, Lamche M, Schramek P, Seitz C.
The Clavien-Dindo classification of complica-
tions used for radical prostatectomy. Wien Med Wochenschr. 2014 Jun 5 (Epub akad of print).
13. Lepor H, et al.
Intraoperative and postoperastive complications of radical retropubic prostatectomy
in a consecutive series of 1,000 cases J Urol 2001; 166(5): 1729–1733.
14. Lepor H, et al.
Contemporary evaluation of optative parameters and complications related to open
radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 2003; 62(4): 702–706.
15. Hisasue C, et al.
Early and late complications of radiál retropubic prostatectomy: experience in a single
institution. Jpn J ClinOncol 2004; 34(5): 274–279.
16. Guillonneau B, Rozet F, Cathelineaum X, et al.
Perioperative complications ofaparoscopic radical
prostatectomy: the Montsouris 3-year experience. J Urol 2002; 167(1): 851–856.
17. Vallancien G, Cathelineau X, Baumert H, Doublet JD, Guillonneau B.
Complications oftrans
peritoneal laparoscopic Surgery in urology: review of 1,311 procedures a single center. J Urol 2002;
168: 23–26.