Umberto Carbonara1,2, Maya Srinath1, Fabio Crocerossa1,3, Matteo Ferro4, Francesco Cantiello3, Giuseppe Lucarelli2, Francesco Porpiglia5, Michele Battaglia2, Pasquale Ditonno2,6, Riccardo Autorino7. 1. Division of Urology, VCU Health, Richmond, VA, 23298-0118, USA. 2. Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation-Urology, Andrology and Kidney Transplantation Unit, University of Bari, Bari, Italy. 3. Department of Urology, Magna Graecia University, Catanzaro, Italy. 4. Department of Urology, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy. 5. Department of Urology, San Luigi Hospital, University of Turin, Orbassano, Italy. 6. Urology Unit, National Cancer Institute IRCCS, "Giovanni Paolo II", Bari, Italy. 7. Division of Urology, VCU Health, Richmond, VA, 23298-0118, USA. ricautor@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To provide a systematic analysis of the comparative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) versus laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) in the treatment of prostate cancer based on the best currently available evidence. METHODS: An independent systematic review of the literature was performed up to February 2021, using MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, and Web of Science® databases. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA) recommendations were followed to design search strategies, selection criteria, and evidence reports. The quality of the included studies was determined using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for non-randomized controlled trials. Demographics and clinical characteristics, surgical, pathological, and functional outcomes were collected. RESULTS: Twenty-six studies were identified. Only 16 "high-quality" (RCTs and Newcastle-Ottawa scale 8-9) studies were included in the meta-analysis. Among the 13,752 patients included, 6135 (44.6%) and 7617 (55.4%) were RARP and LRP, respectively. There was no difference between groups in terms of demographics and clinical characteristics. Overall and major complication (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) rates were similar in LRP than RARP group. The biochemical recurrence (BCR) rate at 12months was significantly lower for RARP (OR: 0.52; 95% CI 0.43-0.63; p < 0.00001). RARP reported lower urinary incontinence rate at 12months (OR: 0.38; 95% CI 0.18-0.8; p = 0.01). The erectile function recovery rate at 12months was higher for RARP (OR: 2.16; 95% CI 1.23-3.78; p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Current evidence shows that RARP offers favorable outcomes compared with LRP, including higher potency and continence rates, and less likelihood of BCR. An assessment of longer-term outcomes is lacking, and higher cost remains a concern of robotic versus laparoscopic prostate cancer surgery.
PURPOSE: To provide a systematic analysis of the comparative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) versus laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) in the treatment of prostate cancer based on the best currently available evidence. METHODS: An independent systematic review of the literature was performed up to February 2021, using MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, and Web of Science® databases. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA) recommendations were followed to design search strategies, selection criteria, and evidence reports. The quality of the included studies was determined using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for non-randomized controlled trials. Demographics and clinical characteristics, surgical, pathological, and functional outcomes were collected. RESULTS: Twenty-six studies were identified. Only 16 "high-quality" (RCTs and Newcastle-Ottawa scale 8-9) studies were included in the meta-analysis. Among the 13,752 patients included, 6135 (44.6%) and 7617 (55.4%) were RARP and LRP, respectively. There was no difference between groups in terms of demographics and clinical characteristics. Overall and major complication (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) rates were similar in LRP than RARP group. The biochemical recurrence (BCR) rate at 12months was significantly lower for RARP (OR: 0.52; 95% CI 0.43-0.63; p < 0.00001). RARP reported lower urinary incontinence rate at 12months (OR: 0.38; 95% CI 0.18-0.8; p = 0.01). The erectile function recovery rate at 12months was higher for RARP (OR: 2.16; 95% CI 1.23-3.78; p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Current evidence shows that RARP offers favorable outcomes compared with LRP, including higher potency and continence rates, and less likelihood of BCR. An assessment of longer-term outcomes is lacking, and higher cost remains a concern of robotic versus laparoscopic prostate cancer surgery.
Authors: Abbas Basiri; Jean Jmch de la Rosette; Shahin Tabatabaei; Henry H Woo; M Pilar Laguna; Hamidreza Shemshaki Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-01-23 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Felix Preisser; Sebastiano Nazzani; Elio Mazzone; Sophie Knipper; Marco Bandini; Zhe Tian; Alexander Haese; Fred Saad; Kevin C Zorn; Francesco Montorsi; Shahrokh F Shariat; Markus Graefen; Derya Tilki; Pierre I Karakiewicz Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-10-12 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Samer L Traboulsi; David-Dan Nguyen; Ahmed S Zakaria; Kyle W Law; Hanna Shahine; Malek Meskawi; Cristina Negrean; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Assaad El Hakim; Kevin C Zorn Journal: World J Urol Date: 2020-02-07 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg; Sigrun Holze; Petra Neuhaus; Iason Kyriazis; Hoang Minh Do; Anja Dietel; Michael C Truss; Corinn I Grzella; Dogu Teber; Markus Hohenfellner; Robert Rabenalt; Peter Albers; Meinhard Mende Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2021-02-09 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Umberto Carbonara; Paolo Minafra; Giuseppe Papapicco; Gaetano De Rienzo; Vincenzo Pagliarulo; Giuseppe Lucarelli; Antonio Vitarelli; Pasquale Ditonno Journal: Eur Urol Open Sci Date: 2022-05-23