Extraperitoneal versus transperitoneal approach for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a contemporary systematic review and meta-analysis
- PMID: 33905056
- DOI: 10.1007/s11701-021-01245-0
Extraperitoneal versus transperitoneal approach for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a contemporary systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract
We aim to evaluate the differences in peri-operative characteristics, surgical complications, and oncological and functional control between the extraperitoneal RARP (EP-RARP) and transperitoneal RARP (TP-RARP). A comprehensive database search was performed up to March 2021 for eligible studies comparing outcomes between EP-RARP versus TP-RARP. This study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and was registered with PROSPERO. A leave-one-out sensitivity analysis was performed to control for heterogeneity and risk of bias. A total of 16 studies were included with 3897 patients, including 2201 (56.5%) EP-RARPs and 1696 (43.5%) TP-RARPs. When compared to TP-RARP, EP-RARP offers faster operative time (MD - 14.4 min; 95% CI - 26.3, - 2.3), decreased length of post-operative stay (MD - 0.9 days, 95% CI - 1.3, - 0.4), and decreased rates of post-operative ileus (RR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1, 0.7) and inguinal hernia formation (RR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1, 0.5). There were no significant differences in total complications, estimated blood loss, positive surgical margins, or continence at 6 months. In this review, EP-RARP delivered similar oncological and functional outcomes, while also offering faster operative time, decreased length of post-operative stay, and decreased rates of post-operative ileus and inguinal hernia formation when compared to TP-RARP. These findings provide evidence-based data for surgical approach optimization and prompts future research to examine whether these findings hold true with recent advances in single-port RARP and outpatient RARP.
Keywords: Extraperitoneal; Radical prostatectomy; Robot-assisted; Systematic review; Transperitoneal.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
Comment in
-
Laparoscopy/New Technology.J Urol. 2022 Oct;208(4):913-914. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000002866. Epub 2022 Jul 21. J Urol. 2022. PMID: 35881830 No abstract available.
References
-
- Binder J, Kramer W (2001) Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 87:408–410 - DOI
-
- Lee JY, Diaz RR, Cho KS, Choi YD (2013) Meta-analysis of transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 23:919–925 - DOI
-
- Kallidonis P, Rai BP, Qazi H et al (2017) Critical appraisal of literature comparing minimally invasive extraperitoneal and transperitoneal radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arab J Urol 15:267–279 - DOI
-
- Higgins JPT, Green S (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. In: The Cochrane collaboration, vol 2, p 126
-
- Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J et al (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6(7):e1000097 - DOI
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
