Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2020 Jan;30(1):73-78.
doi: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000000688.

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy vs. open radical prostatectomy: latest evidences on perioperative, functional and oncological outcomes

Paolo Dell'Oglio  1 , Alexandre Mottrie, Elio Mazzone
Affiliations
Review

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy vs. open radical prostatectomy: latest evidences on perioperative, functional and oncological outcomes

Paolo Dell'Oglio et al. Curr Opin Urol. 2020 Jan.

Abstract

Purpose of review: Despite increasing use of robotic surgery for radical prostatectomy, the benefit of robotic over open approach on different postoperative outcomes is still under debate. The present review aimed to provide a framework on the latest evidences on outcomes of prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) vs. open radical prostatectomy (ORP). Specifically, we focused on postoperative complications, urinary continence and erectile function recovery, PCa recurrence and PCa-related mortality.

Recent findings: Regarding perioperative outcomes, recent studies confirmed lower blood loss, transfusion rates and shorter catheterization time for RARP compared with ORP. Postoperative complications are lower in retrospective analyses, but this trend was not confirmed in prospective studies. Functional outcomes are comparable between RARP and ORP, with a slight nonclinically meaningful benefit in favour of RARP. The mid-term update of a recent randomized trial showed better oncological outcomes at 24 months, but the strength of this finding is limited by methodological flaws. Conversely, contemporary retrospective studies did not demonstrate differences in terms of biochemical recurrence between the two surgical approaches.

Summary: The recent large uptake of RARP relative to ORP was sustained by evidences showing improved perioperative outcomes but not clear benefit on functional and oncological outcomes.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Mazzone E, Mistretta FA, Knipper S, et al. Contemporary national assessment of robot-assisted surgery rates and total hospital charges for major surgical uro-oncological procedures in the United States. J Endourol 2019; 33:438–447.
    1. Coughlin GD, Yaxley JW, Chambers SK, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus open radical retropubic prostatectomy: 24-month outcomes from a randomised controlled study. Lancet Oncol 2018; 19:1051–1060.
    1. Yaxley JW, Coughlin GD, Chambers SK, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus open radical retropubic prostatectomy: early outcomes from a randomised controlled phase 3 study. Lancet 2016; 388:1057–1066.
    1. Fossati N, Wiklund P, Rochat CH, et al. Robotic and open radical prostatectomy: the first prospective randomised controlled trial fuels debate rather than closing the question. Eur Urol 2017; 71:307–308.
    1. Martini A, Gandaglia G, Briganti A. What is new in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Curr Opin Urol 2019; 29:14–18.