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
. 2025 Jul 4;61(7):1222.
doi: 10.3390/medicina61071222.

Advances in Techniques in Radical Prostatectomy

Affiliations
Review

Advances in Techniques in Radical Prostatectomy

Hui Miin Lau et al. Medicina (Kaunas). .

Abstract

Since its development in 1904, radical prostatectomy (RP) has remained a fundamental surgical option in the management of localised prostate cancer. Over time, continuous advancements in surgical techniques have improved oncological outcomes while reducing functional complications. This narrative review explores the evolution of RP, depicting its progression from the traditional open approach to minimally invasive laparoscopic and robotic-assisted techniques. Key developments in RP techniques, including nerve-sparing, bladder neck-sparing and Retzius-sparing techniques as well as enhanced perioperative management, have contributed to reduced postoperative complications, namely incontinence and erectile dysfunction. Additionally, technological innovations such as augmented reality, utilising indocyanine green for improved visualisation of prostatic boundaries and illuminare-1 to easily identify nerves intraoperatively, artificial intelligence, and novel molecular imaging technologies such as PSMA PETs for improved margin assessment are shaping the future of RPs. Despite these advancements, challenges persist, including a steep learning curve associated with newer techniques, disparities in access due to cost considerations, and a lack of standardised outcome measures across different surgical approaches. This review provides insight into current trends, ongoing challenges, and future directions that may further refine surgical precision, enhance patient safety, and improve long-term treatment success in prostate cancer management.

Keywords: prostate cancer; radical prostatectomy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Graphical representation of comparisons of perioperative variables in RARP vs. LAP vs. ORP.

Similar articles

References

    1. World Cancer Research Fund Prostate Cancer Statistics. World Cancer Research Fund. World Cancer Research Fund. 2024. [(accessed on 24 April 2025)]. Available online: https://www.wcrf.org/preventing-cancer/cancer-statistics/prostate-cancer...
    1. Young H.H. The Early Diagnosis and Radical Cure of Carcinoma of the Prostate: Being a Study of 40 Cases and Presentation of a Radical Operation which was Carried Out in Four Cases. J. Urol. 2002;168:914–921. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64542-9. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Millin T. Retropubic Prostatectomy a New Extravesical Technique: Report on 20 Cases. Lancet. 1945;246:693–696. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(45)91030-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Wroński S. Radical Perineal Prostatectomy—The Contemporary Resurgence of a Genuinely Minimally Invasive Procedure: Procedure Outline. Comparison of the advantages, disadvantages, and Outcomes of Different Surgical Techniques of Treating organ-confined Prostate Cancer (PCa). A Literature Review with Special Focus on Perineal Prostatectomy. Cent. Eur. J. Urol. 2012;65:188–194. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Schuessler W.W., Schulam P.G., Clayman R.V., Kavoussi L.R. Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: Initial Short-Term Experience. Urology. 1997;50:854–857. doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00543-8. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources