PURPOSE: We compared standard robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in a multicenter study using prospective patient reported outcome measures of functional recovery and quality of life plus standard pentafecta outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patient and physician reported data on 483 patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy from August 2017 to April 2020 by 3 experienced surgeons had been prospectively collected. Perioperative and pentafecta outcomes were analyzed using SPSS software. Patient reported outcome measures for urinary function, erectile function and quality of life were reported at baseline and at 7 days and 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: A total of 201 patients underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and 282 had Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Patient and tumor characteristics were similar except for fewer low risk and more intermediate risk disease in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy vs Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (p <0.001). High risk disease was similar between groups (p=0.071). Immediate urinary continence was higher in Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy group (70.4% vs 58.1%, p=0.02), with less nocturnal enuresis prevalence (p=0.011) and bother (p=0.009) with no significant differences afterwards. A better quality of life (p=0.004) was reported 1 week after surgery. No other differences in functional or quality of life outcomes, perioperative parameters, complications or margin rates were found. CONCLUSIONS: Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy is associated with better immediate continence than anterior robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with no differences in longer-term functional recovery, quality of life or other important outcomes. The overall similarity in outcomes between groups lends support to the view that the surgical technique matters less than the surgeon performing it.
PURPOSE: We compared standard robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in a multicenter study using prospective patient reported outcome measures of functional recovery and quality of life plus standard pentafecta outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patient and physician reported data on 483 patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy from August 2017 to April 2020 by 3 experienced surgeons had been prospectively collected. Perioperative and pentafecta outcomes were analyzed using SPSS software. Patient reported outcome measures for urinary function, erectile function and quality of life were reported at baseline and at 7 days and 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: A total of 201 patients underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and 282 had Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Patient and tumor characteristics were similar except for fewer low risk and more intermediate risk disease in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy vs Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (p <0.001). High risk disease was similar between groups (p=0.071). Immediate urinary continence was higher in Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy group (70.4% vs 58.1%, p=0.02), with less nocturnal enuresis prevalence (p=0.011) and bother (p=0.009) with no significant differences afterwards. A better quality of life (p=0.004) was reported 1 week after surgery. No other differences in functional or quality of life outcomes, perioperative parameters, complications or margin rates were found. CONCLUSIONS: Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy is associated with better immediate continence than anterior robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with no differences in longer-term functional recovery, quality of life or other important outcomes. The overall similarity in outcomes between groups lends support to the view that the surgical technique matters less than the surgeon performing it.
Authors: Stefano Tappero; Paolo Dell'Oglio; Mattia Longoni; Carlo Buratto; Erika Palagonia; Pietro Scilipoti; Enrico Vecchio; Marco Martiriggiano; Silvia Secco; Alberto Olivero; Michele Barbieri; Giancarlo Napoli; Elena Strada; Giovanni Petralia; Dario Di Trapani; Aldo Massimo Bocciardi; Antonio Galfano Journal: World J Urol Date: 2022-06-30 Impact factor: 3.661
Authors: Jim Adshead; Nikhil Vasdev; Jonathan Noël; Neil H Spencer; Siya Lodia; Seiver Karim; Surina Taneja; Darius Moghanchizadeh; Arvind Nayak; Ashwin Tamhankar; Seema Angra; Rajiv Swamy; Samita Agarwal; Ashish Narula; Tim Lane Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2021-10-30