Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 668

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: THE MONTSOURIS TECHNIQUE

GUILLONNEAU, BERTRAND, VALLANCIEN, GUY·2000·Journal of Urology

Abstract

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy has become standard at our institution based on experience with 260 consecutive cases operated on between January 1998 and December 1999. In view of the favorable short-term outcomes we describe our standardized laparoscopic radical prostatectomy technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two urologists trained in open retropubic radical prostatectomy and laparoscopy combined their experience to develop a specific technique of nonincisional radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer. Patients presented with clinical stages T1b to T2 prostate cancer and tumor size was approximately 18 to 130 gm. Operations were performed by 1 senior surgeon and 1 assistant, with the help of a voice controlled robot and with the patient under general anesthesia. The 2, 10 mm. ports and 3, 5 mm. ports were placed in the umbilicus and iliac fossa. The laparoscopic procedure was performed transperitoneally, combining anterograde and retrograde approaches in 7 standardized steps. Urethrovesical anastomosis was performed with 3-zero interrupted sutures tied intracorporeally. Technical details were compiled, summarized and illustrated with schematic views. RESULTS: Operating time was approximately 3 hours for the last 120 cases. Estimated average blood loss was 250 ml. with a transfusion rate of less than 1%. The conversion rate was 0%. Postoperative pain was minimal and analgesics were generally not required by postoperative day 2. The accuracy of dissection and sutures allowed patients to be discharged home without urethral catheterization starting on postoperative day 3. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is now not only feasible, but more importantly reproducible. Each step has been checked and validated, and the procedure is standardized and has definitively replaced the retropubic approach in our practice.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0022-5347(05)67512-x

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 668

Metadata

Authors
GUILLONNEAU, B., & VALLANCIEN, G.
Venue
Journal of Urology
Published
2000-06
Volume
163
Issue
6
Pages
1643-1649
ISSN
  • 0022-5347 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-3792
OpenAlex
W1994147432
Cited by
668
References
3
FWCI
29.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: THE MONTSOURIS TECHNIQUE. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0022-5347(05)67512-x
The paper
GUILLONNEAU, B., & VALLANCIEN, G. (2000). LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: THE MONTSOURIS TECHNIQUE. Journal of Urology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(05)67512-x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.