Management of XXXX during robotic radical prostatectomy.

@entity1 @entity254 @entity292 @entity1241 @entity130
OBJECTIVES: To review the incidence and management of @entity130 in 4400 consecutive cases of robotic radical prostatectomy at a single institution. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From September 2001 to September 2009, 4400 @entity1 underwent robotic radical prostatectomy. We reviewed the intraoperative and postoperative data from @entity1 with @entity130 . Once recognized, the @entity130 were closed in 2 layers. Clear liquids were started the day after surgery. Healing of the vesicourethral @entity254 was confirmed by cystography 5-14 days postoperatively. RESULTS: @entity130 were identified in 10 @entity1 (0.2%). The mean @entity1 age was 58.6 years (range 44-68), and the mean body mass index was 25.8 kg/m(2) (range 22-29). The mean prostate-specific antigen level was 7.1 ng/mL (range 0.9-14.8), and the mean prostate weight was 58.9 g (range 22-102). The clinical stage was T1c, T2a, and T2c in 7, 2, and 1 @entity1 , respectively. The preoperative Gleason score was 6, 7, and 8 in 3, 3, and 4 @entity1 , respectively. All @entity130 were diagnosed and repaired intraoperatively. Of the 10 @entity1 , 9 had an uneventful postoperative course. The average urethral catheterization time for these @entity1 was 14 days (range 6-21). One @entity1 had gross @entity1241 and developed a @entity292 requiring a delayed diverting colostomy. No perioperative mortality occurred. CONCLUSIONS: We found a low incidence of @entity130 during robotic radical prostatectomy. We have also demonstrated that @entity130 can be managed primarily with meticulous closure with minimal morbidity.
