Comparative evaluation of continence and potency after radical prostatectomy: Robotic vs. laparoscopic approaches, validating LAP-01 trial
- PMID: 38991627
- DOI: 10.1016/j.suronc.2024.102098
Comparative evaluation of continence and potency after radical prostatectomy: Robotic vs. laparoscopic approaches, validating LAP-01 trial
Abstract
Background: Minimally invasive techniques have demonstrated several advantages over the open approach. In the field of prostate cancer, the LAP-01 trial demonstrated the superiority of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) over laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) when comparing continence at 3-month after surgery, with no statistically significant differences at 6 and 12 months of follow-up.
Objectives: Externally validate the LAP-01 study and compare functional outcomes between the two minimally invasive approaches.
Material and methods: This retrospective study, conducted by a single surgeon (MRB), utilized data from a prospectively collected database, which included patients who underwent both RARP or LRP. Data regarding baseline characteristics, continence (assessed through the 24-h Pad test and ICIQ questionnaire) and potency were collected at multiple time points: 1 and 6 weeks after catheter removal, 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-surgery.
Results: The study encompasses 601 patients, 455 who underwent LRP and 146 RARP. The median age at diagnosis was 64 for LRP and 62 for RARP, while the median PSA levels at diagnosis were 6.7 ng/mL for LRP and 6.5 ng/mL for RARP. Bilateral nerve-sparing procedures were performed in 34.07 % of LRP cases and 51.37 % of RARP cases. RARP exhibited a significant advantage over LRP both in continence and potency. Continence rates at 3-, 6- and 9-month after radical prostatectomy (RP) were 36.43 %, 61.86 % and 79.87 % for LRP, compared to 50.98 %, 69.87 % and 91.69 % for RARP. Potency rates at the same intervals were 0.90 %, 3.16 % and 6.39 % for LRP, and 6.19 %, 9.16 % and 18.96 % for RARP. These rates were more pronounced in patients with bilateral nerve-sparing.
Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that RARP results in significantly better continence recovery and superior potency outcomes throughout the entire follow-up period compared to LRP, even at the beginning of the robotic approach learning curve.
Keywords: Continence; Functional; Laparoscopic; Potency; Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy; Robotic assisted.
Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of competing interest None.
Similar articles
-
Ten-year functional and oncological outcomes of a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic versus robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.Prostate. 2024 Jun;84(9):832-841. doi: 10.1002/pros.24702. Epub 2024 Apr 4. Prostate. 2024. PMID: 38572570 Clinical Trial.
-
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.
-
Comparison of perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes between standard laparoscopic and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systemic review and meta-analysis.Surg Endosc. 2017 Mar;31(3):1045-1060. doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-5125-1. Epub 2016 Jul 21. Surg Endosc. 2017. PMID: 27444830
-
Randomised controlled trial comparing laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.Eur Urol. 2013 Apr;63(4):606-14. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.07.007. Epub 2012 Jul 20. Eur Urol. 2013. PMID: 22840353 Clinical Trial.
-
[Robot assisted radical prostatectomy: What are the evidences at the time of a specific funding?].Prog Urol. 2017 Mar;27(3):146-157. doi: 10.1016/j.purol.2016.12.010. Epub 2017 Feb 4. Prog Urol. 2017. PMID: 28169123 French.
Cited by
-
[Surgical techniques to improve continence after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy based on video-anatomy-a review].Urologie. 2025 Jun 16. doi: 10.1007/s00120-025-02627-0. Online ahead of print. Urologie. 2025. PMID: 40522376 Review. German.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous