OBJECTIVE: To compare the oncological and functional outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We compared patients who underwent the RARP (n=778) and LRP (n=48) techniques for prostate cancer between January 2008 and July 2017 in our clinic. Patient demographics, preoperative and postoperative data, pathologic evaluation, continence, and potency rates were collected and analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: The preoperative and demographic data of the patients we included in our study were similar. The mean operation time estimated blood loss, length of hospitalization, and catheterization time were significantly shorter in the RARP group. The statistical analysis was in favor of robotic prostatectomy in the terms of the mean length of hospitalization, catheterization time, and early (<30 days) and intermediate (31-90 days) complications. Positive surgical margins and biochemical recurrence rates, and recovery of continence and erectile function, were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: RARP and LRP in organ-confined prostate cancer are safe and effective methods. Robotic prostatectomy has a shorter operative time, length of hospitalization, catheterization time, and lower early and late complication rates.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the oncological and functional outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We compared patients who underwent the RARP (n=778) and LRP (n=48) techniques for prostate cancer between January 2008 and July 2017 in our clinic. Patient demographics, preoperative and postoperative data, pathologic evaluation, continence, and potency rates were collected and analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: The preoperative and demographic data of the patients we included in our study were similar. The mean operation time estimated blood loss, length of hospitalization, and catheterization time were significantly shorter in the RARP group. The statistical analysis was in favor of robotic prostatectomy in the terms of the mean length of hospitalization, catheterization time, and early (<30 days) and intermediate (31-90 days) complications. Positive surgical margins and biochemical recurrence rates, and recovery of continence and erectile function, were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: RARP and LRP in organ-confined prostate cancer are safe and effective methods. Robotic prostatectomy has a shorter operative time, length of hospitalization, catheterization time, and lower early and late complication rates.
Authors: Vincenzo Ficarra; Giacomo Novara; Thomas E Ahlering; Anthony Costello; James A Eastham; Markus Graefen; Giorgio Guazzoni; Mani Menon; Alexandre Mottrie; Vipul R Patel; Henk Van der Poel; Raymond C Rosen; Ashutosh K Tewari; Timothy G Wilson; Filiberto Zattoni; Francesco Montorsi Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2012-06-01 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Izak Faiena; Viktor Y Dombrovskiy; Parth K Modi; Neal Patel; Rutveej Patel; Amirali H Salmasi; Jaspreet S Parihar; Eric A Singer; Isaac Y Kim Journal: Clin Genitourin Cancer Date: 2015-05-28 Impact factor: 2.872
Authors: Kimberly D Miller; Rebecca L Siegel; Chun Chieh Lin; Angela B Mariotto; Joan L Kramer; Julia H Rowland; Kevin D Stein; Rick Alteri; Ahmedin Jemal Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2016-06-02 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Hamid Abboudi; Mohammed Shamim Khan; Khurshid A Guru; Saied Froghi; Gunter de Win; Hendrik Van Poppel; Prokar Dasgupta; Kamran Ahmed Journal: BJU Int Date: 2013-10-24 Impact factor: 5.588