A matched-pair comparison between bilateral intrafascial and interfascial nerve-sparing techniques in extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

The aim of this study was to validate the advantages of the intrafascial nerve-sparing technique compared with the interfascial nerve-sparing technique in extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. From March 2010 to August 2011, 65 patients with localized prostate cancer （PCa） underwent bilateral intrafascial nerve-sparing extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. These patients were matched in a 1.2 ratio to 130 patients with localized PCa who had undergone bilateral interfascial nerve-sparing extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy between January 2008 and August 2011. Operative data and oncological and functional results of both groups were compared. There was no difference in operative data, pathological stages and overall rates of positive surgical margins between the groups. There were 9 and 13 patients lost to follow-up in the intrafascial group and interfascial group, respectively. The intrafascial technique provided earlier recovery of continence at both 3 and 6 months than the interfascial technique. Equal results in terms of continence were found in both groups at 12 months. Better rates of potency at 6 months and 12 months were found in younger patients （age 65 years） and overall patients who had undergone the intrafascial nerve-sparing extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Biochemical progression-free survival rates I year postoperatively were similar in both groups. Using strict indications, compared with the interfascial nerve-sparing technique, the intrafascial technique provided similar operative outcomes and short-term oncological results, quicker recovery of continence and better potency. The intrafascial nerve-sparing technique is recommended as a preferred approach for young PCa patients who are clinical stages cT1 to cT2a and have normal preoperative potency.

Application of Intrafascial Neurovascular Bundle Spare Technique in Radical Cystectomy

Objective: To investigate the significance of intrafascial neurovascular bundle spare technique in radical cystectomy. Methods: Between March 2010 and December 2011, a total of 26 bladder cancer patients were treated with radical cystectomy, and intrafascial neurovascular bundle spare technique was applied in all these patients. Mean age of 26 patients was 56.1 y (45 - 66). Among 26 patients, 21 cases were in stage T2, 5 cases were in stage T3. All patients choose Orthotopic neobladder as urinary diversion manner. We use intrafascial neurovascular bundle spare technique, dissect between prostatic fascial and prostatic capsule, spare neurovascular bundle. Operating time, blood loss, complications, continence and sexual function 3 months after surgery were recorded. Results: In all patients, mean operating time was 328 min, mean blood loss was 316 ml. Only 4 patients need transfusion during surgery. 1 case of urinary fistula was found after surgery, and spontaneously cured 10 days after surgery. 1 case of bowel obstruction was found, and was cured by conservative therapy. 4 cases of incontinence were found 3 months after surgery. 18 patients had a nomal erectile function 3 months after surgery. Conclusions: Intrafascial neurovascular bundle spare technique can safely and effectively reserve neurovascular bundle in radical cystectomy. Patients can reserve continence and erectile function by this technique.