Robot-assisted vs pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: are there any differences?
OBJECTIVE
To compare our experience of pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RAP).


METHODS
The two techniques were compared retrospectively in 100 patients with localized prostate cancer who had LRP or RAP (50 each). Both groups were similar in age, serum prostate-specific antigen level, Gleason score and clinical stage. Their charts were reviewed, collating intraoperative data and early functional outcome.


RESULTS
The mean surgical time for LRP and RAP was 235 and 202 min (P > 0.05) and mean (95% confidence interval) blood loss 299 (40) and 206 (63) mL (P = 0.014), with no transfusions in either group. The positive margin rate did not differ significantly (14% LRP and 12% RAP) and there was no biochemical recurrence in either group. Early functional outcomes were similar.


CONCLUSIONS
Both LRP and RAP are technically demanding, but feasible, with the patient clearly benefiting. There were no major surgical differences between the techniques, but RAP is more costly.
Joseph
Jean V
JV
Section of Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery, Department of Urology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York 14642-8656, USA. jean_joseph@URMC.rochester.edu
Vicente
Ivelisse
I
Madeb
Ralph
R
Erturk
Erdal
E
Patel
Hitendra R H
HR
D007172:Erectile Dysfunction / Q000209:etiology; D006801:Humans; D010535:Laparoscopy / Q000379:methods*; D007902:Length of Stay; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000209:etiology; D011468:Prostatectomy / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D011471:Prostatic Neoplasms / Q000601:surgery*; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D012371:Robotics; D014549:Urinary Incontinence / Q000601:surgery