Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Urol. 2005 Jun;173(6):1863-70.

Contemporary appraisal of radical perineal prostatectomy.

Author information

  • 1Divisions of Urology, Oregon Health and Sciences University, Portland, Oregon, USA.

Erratum in

  • J Urol. 2005 Oct;174(4 Pt 1):1505.



In the age of minimally invasive surgery there has been renewed interest in the perineal approach for the surgical treatment of prostate cancer. We reviewed recent publications regarding radical perineal prostatectomy (RPP) in an effort to define its role in the current management of localized prostate malignancy. At the same time we reviewed the relevant perineal anatomy and surgical approach necessary to perform this operation.


We performed a review of the literature with respect to RPP and included our own extensive experience with this operation, emphasizing patient selection, the current role of pelvic lymph node dissection, surgical anatomy, oncological outcomes and complications.


RPP is an effective treatment for localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate with oncological outcomes similar to those of the retropubic technique. In comparison to RRP, patients undergoing RPP have less postoperative discomfort, more rapid return of bowel function, more rapid return to work and a decreased transfusion rate. In addition, RRP is now often performed with cavernous nerve sparing. Prostate specific antigen screening has made the rate of lymph node metastasis low enough to omit lymphadenectomy in many cases.


There is still a role for RPP in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Erectile dysfunction after nerve sparing and incontinence rates are similar to those of RRP. In addition, it is less morbid then RRP without being as technically challenging as laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Support Center