Ten-year functional and oncological outcomes of a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic versus robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
- PMID: 38572570
- DOI: 10.1002/pros.24702
Ten-year functional and oncological outcomes of a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic versus robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
Abstract
Background: Among prostate cancer (PCa) treatment options, mini-invasive surgical approaches have gained a wide diffusion in the last decades. The aim of this study was to present oncological, functional, and quality of life data after 10 years of follow-up of a prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) (ISRCTN11552140) comparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) versus laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) for the treatment of PCa.
Methods: Patients with localized PCa were randomized to undergo LRP or RARP between January 2010 and January 2011. Functional (continence and potency) and oncological (prostate-specific antigen, biochemical recurrence [BCR] and BCR-free survival [BCRFS]) variables were evaluated. BCRFS curves were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Machine learning partial least square-discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) was used to identify the variables characterizing more the patients who underwent RARP or LRP.
Results: Seventy-five of the originally enrolled 120 patients remained on follow-up for 10 years; 40 (53%) underwent RARP and 35 (47%) LRP. Continence and potency recovery rates did not show significant differences (p = 0.068 and p = 0.56, respectively), despite a Δ12% for continence and Δ8% for potency in favor of the robotic approach. However, the quality of continence (in terms of International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form [ICIQ-SF] score) and erection (in terms of International Index of Erectile Function-5 [IIEF-5] score) was significantly better after 10 years in the robotic group (p = 0.02 and p < 0.001). PLS-DA revealed that LRP was characterized by the worst functional-related outcomes analyzing the entire follow-up period. Four (10%) and six (17%) patients experienced BCR in RARP and LRP groups, respectively (p = 0.36), with an overall 10-year BCR-free survival of 88% and 78% (p = 0.16).
Conclusions: Comparable continence and potency rates were observed between RARP and LRP after a 10-year follow-up. However, the RARP group exhibited superior totally dry rate and erection quality. No difference in terms of oncological outcomes was found.
Keywords: LRP; RARP; erectile dysfunction; incontinence; prostate cancer.
© 2024 The Authors. The Prostate published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Similar articles
-
Comparative evaluation of continence and potency after radical prostatectomy: Robotic vs. laparoscopic approaches, validating LAP-01 trial.Surg Oncol. 2024 Aug;55:102098. doi: 10.1016/j.suronc.2024.102098. Epub 2024 Jun 28. Surg Oncol. 2024. PMID: 38991627
-
Five-year Outcomes for a Prospective Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing Laparoscopic and Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy.Eur Urol Focus. 2018 Jan;4(1):80-86. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2016.11.007. Epub 2016 Nov 23. Eur Urol Focus. 2018. PMID: 28753822 Clinical Trial.
-
Robotic-assisted Versus Laparoscopic Surgery: Outcomes from the First Multicentre, Randomised, Patient-blinded Controlled Trial in Radical Prostatectomy (LAP-01).Eur Urol. 2021 Jun;79(6):750-759. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.01.030. Epub 2021 Feb 9. Eur Urol. 2021. PMID: 33573861 Clinical Trial.
-
Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy versus standard laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: an evidence-based analysis of comparative outcomes.World J Urol. 2021 Oct;39(10):3721-3732. doi: 10.1007/s00345-021-03687-5. Epub 2021 Apr 11. World J Urol. 2021. PMID: 33843016
-
Robot-assisted and laparoscopic vs open radical prostatectomy in clinically localized prostate cancer: perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes: A Systematic review and meta-analysis.Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 May;98(22):e15770. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000015770. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019. PMID: 31145297 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Real-Life Comparative Analysis of Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy in a Single Centre Experience.Cancers (Basel). 2024 Oct 25;16(21):3604. doi: 10.3390/cancers16213604. Cancers (Basel). 2024. PMID: 39518044 Free PMC article.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Mottet N, Van Den Bergh RCN, Briers E, et al. EAU‐EANM‐ESTRO‐ESUR‐SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer‐2020 Update. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2021;79(2):243‐262. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.042
-
- Checcucci E, Amparore D, De Luca S, Autorino R, Fiori C, Porpiglia F. Precision prostate cancer surgery: an overview of new technologies and techniques. Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2019;71(5):487‐501. doi:10.23736/S0393-2249.19.03365-4
-
- Basiri A, de la Rosette JJ, Tabatabaei S, Woo HH, Laguna MP, Shemshaki H. Comparison of retropubic, laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy: who is the winner? World J Urol. 2018;36(4):609‐621. doi:10.1007/s00345-018-2174-1
-
- Lantz A, Bock D, Akre O, et al. Functional and oncological outcomes after open versus robot‐assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for localised prostate cancer: 8‐year follow‐up. Eur Urol. 2021;80(5):650‐660. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2021.07.025
-
- 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(8):1051‐1060. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30357-7
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous