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
Clinical Trial
. 2020 Jun;203(6):1135-1140.
doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000700. Epub 2019 Dec 17.

Extraperitoneal versus Transperitoneal Single Port Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: A Comparative Analysis of Perioperative Outcomes

Jihad Kaouk  1 , Alireza Aminsharifi  1   2 , Clark A Wilson  1 , Guilherme Sawczyn  1 , Juan Garisto  1 , Simone Francavilla  3 , Michael Abern, Simone Crivellaro  3
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Extraperitoneal versus Transperitoneal Single Port Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: A Comparative Analysis of Perioperative Outcomes

Jihad Kaouk et al. J Urol. 2020 Jun.

Abstract

Purpose: We compared intraoperative and perioperative outcomes between extraperitoneal and transperitoneal radical prostatectomy performed using a "purpose-designed" single port robotic platform.

Materials and methods: A total of 98 patients underwent single port robotic prostatectomy using the da Vinci SP® robotic system with extraperitoneal (group I, 52) vs transperitoneal (group II, 46) approach. Demographics and perioperative data including postoperative recovery outcomes were recorded and compared between the 2 groups.

Results: Groups were similar in terms of demographics and prostate cancer risk category. Mean operative time (201±37.5 vs 248.2±42.3 minutes, p <0.00001) as well as median postoperative hospital stay (4.3 vs 25.7 hours p <0.0001) was significantly shorter with the extraperitoneal approach. Overall need for pain medications or narcotics as well as the required amount of narcotics per patient (if administered) were significantly lower with the extraperitoneal approach. Extraprostatic extension was detected in 48.1% vs 41.3% of patients in groups I and II, respectively. Surgical margins were positive in 26.9% in group I vs 41.3% in group II (p=0.13). More than 80% of patients with positive surgical margins had high risk features on final surgical pathology. The 90-day continence rate was similar between the 2 groups (60% vs 62.5%, p=0.82).

Conclusions: Extraperitoneal and transperitoneal single port robotic radical prostatectomy are safe and feasible approaches. The extraperitoneal approach is associated with a significantly shorter postoperative hospital stay and decreased need for postoperative narcotics. Randomized trials with adequate sample size and postoperative followup are advisable for further evaluation of the outcomes to clarify patient selection criteria for each approach.

Keywords: abdominal cavity; prostatectomy; prostatic neoplasms; robotic surgical procedures.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Editorial Comment.
    Chen IA, Sooriakumaran P. Chen IA, et al. J Urol. 2020 Jun;203(6):1140. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000700.01. Epub 2020 Mar 30. J Urol. 2020. PMID: 32223586 No abstract available.