Retropubic, Laparoscopic, and Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Critical Review of Outcomes Reported by High-Volume Centers
- 1 December 2010
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Mary Ann Liebert Inc in Journal of Endourology
- Vol. 24 (12), 2003-2015
- https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2010.0295
Abstract
Purpose: To critically review perioperative outcomes, positive surgical margin (PSM) rates, and functional outcomes of several large series of retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP), laparoscopic RP (LRP), and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) currently available in the literature. Methods: A Medline database search was performed from November 1994 to May 2009, using medical subject heading search terms “prostatectomy” and “Outcome Assessment (Health Care)” and text words “retropubic,” “robotic,” and “laparoscopic.” Only studies with a sample size of 250 or more patients were considered. Weighted means were calculated for all outcomes using the number of patients included in each study as the weighing factor. Results: We identified 30 articles for RRP, 14 for LRP, and 14 for RARP. The mean intraoperative and postoperative RRP transfusion rates for RRP, LRP, and RARP were 20.1%, 3.5%, and 1.4%, respectively. The weighted mean postoperative complication rates for RRP, LRP, and RARP were 10.3% (4.8% to 26.9%), 10.98% (8.9 to 27.7%), and 10.3% (4.3% to 15.7%), respectively. RARP revealed a mean overall PSM rate of 13.6%, whereas LRP and RRP yielded a PSM of 21.3% and 24%, respectively. The weighted mean continence rates at 12 month follow-up for RRP, LRP, and RARP were 79%, 84.8%, and 92%, respectively. The weighted mean potency rates for patients who underwent unilateral or bilateral nerve sparing, at 12 month follow-up, were 43.1% and 60.6% for RRP, 31.1% and 54% for LRP, and 59.9% and 93.5% for RARP. Conclusion: RRP, LRP, and RARP performed in high-volume centers are safe options for treatment of patients with localized prostate cancer, presenting similar overall complication rates. LRP and RARP, however, are associated with decreased operative blood loss and decreased risk of transfusion when compared with RRP. Our analysis including high-volume centers also showed lower weighted mean PSM rates and higher continence and potency rates after RARP compared with RRP and LRP. However, the lack of randomized trials precludes definitive conclusions.Keywords
This publication has 80 references indexed in Scilit:
- Robotic Radical Prostatectomy for Patients with Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer Is Feasible: Results of a Single-Institution StudyJournal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques, 2009
- Predicting an Optimal Outcome After Radical Prostatectomy: The Trifecta NomogramJournal of Urology, 2008
- Comprehensive Prospective Comparative Analysis of Outcomes Between Open and Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy Conducted in 2003 to 2005Journal of Urology, 2008
- Total reconstruction of the vesico‐urethral junctionBJU International, 2008
- Complications, Urinary Continence, and Oncologic Outcome of 1000 Laparoscopic Transperitoneal Radical Prostatectomies—Experience at the Charité Hospital Berlin, Campus MitteEuropean Urology, 2006
- EXTRAPERITONEAL LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: A PROSPECTIVE EVALUATION OF 600 CASESJournal of Urology, 2005
- CLASSIFICATION AND TRENDS OF PERIOPERATIVE MORBIDITIES FOLLOWING LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMYJournal of Urology, 2005
- 5-YEAR URINARY AND SEXUAL OUTCOMES AFTER RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: RESULTS FROM THE PROSTATE CANCER OUTCOMES STUDYJournal of Urology, 2005
- INTRAOPERATIVE AND POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS OF RADICAL RETROPUBIC PROSTATECTOMY IN A CONSECUTIVE SERIES OF 1,000 CASESJournal of Urology, 2001
- The urethral sphincter muscle in the maleJournal of Anatomy, 1980