» Articles » PMID: 22840353

Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing Laparoscopic and Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy

Overview
Journal Eur Urol
Specialty Urology
Date 2012 Jul 31
PMID 22840353
Citations 70
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The advantages of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) over laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) have rarely been investigated in randomised controlled trials.

Objective: To compare RARP and LRP in terms of the functional, perioperative, and oncologic outcomes. The main end point of the study was changes in continence 3 mo after surgery.

Design, Setting, And Participants: From January 2010 to January 2011, 120 patients with organ-confined prostate cancer were enrolled and randomly assigned (using a randomisation plan) to one of two groups based on surgical approach: the RARP group and the LRP group.

Intervention: All RARP and LRP interventions were performed with the same technique by the same single surgeon.

Outcome Measurements And Statistical Analysis: The demographic, perioperative, and pathologic results, such as the complications and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurements, were recorded and compared. Continence was evaluated at the time of catheter removal and 48 h later, and continence and potency were evaluated after 1, 3, 6, and 12 mo. The student t test, Mann-Whitney test, χ(2) test, Pearson χ(2) test, and multiple regression analysis were used for statistics.

Results And Limitations: The two groups (RARP: n=60; LRP: n=60) were comparable in terms of demographic data. No differences were recorded in terms of perioperative and pathologic results, complication rate, or PSA measurements. The continence rate was higher in the RARP group at every time point: Continence after 3 mo was 80% in the RARP group and 61.6% in the LRP group (p=0.044), and after 1 yr, the continence rate was 95.0% and 83.3%, respectively (p=0.042). Among preoperative potent patients treated with nerve-sparing techniques, the rate of erection recovery was 80.0% and 54.2%, respectively (p=0.020). The limitations included the small number of patients.

Conclusions: RARP provided better functional results in terms of the recovery of continence and potency. Further studies are needed to confirm our results.

Citing Articles

The environmental impact of multi-specialty robotic-assisted surgery: a waste audit analysis.

Tjahyadi G, Treacy P, Alexander K, Bird J, Karunaratne S, Leslie S J Robot Surg. 2025; 19(1):113.

PMID: 40069533 PMC: 11897078. DOI: 10.1007/s11701-025-02278-5.


Integrating clinical and image-based parameters for prediction of early post-prostatectomy incontinence recovery: simplified nomogram approach.

Shao I, Chen S, Chen H, Sheng T, Chang Y, Liu C BMC Cancer. 2024; 24(1):1344.

PMID: 39482661 PMC: 11529020. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-13072-1.


Different inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile malignancy: a pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Han Z, Yi X, Li J, Tang Y, Liao D, Zhang T Int J Surg. 2024; 111(1):1488-1491.

PMID: 38990297 PMC: 11745603. DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000001937.


Preoperative high serum total testosterone levels predict preserved postoperative sexual function in patients after nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Saito K, Kohada Y, Hieda K, Shikuma H, Hatayama T, Tasaka R Int J Urol. 2024; 31(9):1038-1045.

PMID: 38845601 PMC: 11524130. DOI: 10.1111/iju.15511.


The evaluation of cardiac functions in deep Trendelenburg position during robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy.

Kilinc E, Yildirim S, Ulugol H, Eroglu Buyukoner E, Gucyetmez B, Toraman F Front Med (Lausanne). 2023; 10:1273180.

PMID: 37822468 PMC: 10563763. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1273180.