0 152

Cited 0 times in

Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy versus open retropubic radical prostatectomy: a prospective comparative study with 19-month follow-up

 Ali Abdel Raheem  ;  Ayman Hagras  ;  Ahmed Ghaith  ;  Mohamed J Alenzi  ;  Ahmed Elghiaty  ;  Tarek Gameel  ;  Ibrahim Alowidah  ;  Won S Ham  ;  Young D Choi  ;  Abdel H El-Bahnasy  ;  Adel Omar  ;  Mohamed El-Bendary  ;  Koon H Rha 
 MINERVA UROLOGICA E NEFROLOGICA, Vol.72(5) : 586-594, 2020-10 
Journal Title
Issue Date
Aged ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Kaplan-Meier Estimate ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local ; Pain, Postoperative / epidemiology ; Perioperative Care ; Postoperative Complications / epidemiology ; Prospective Studies ; Prostatectomy / methods* ; Prostatic Neoplasms / surgery ; Robotic Surgical Procedures / methods* ; Treatment Outcome ; Urinary Incontinence / epidemiology ; Urinary Incontinence / etiology
Background: The aim of the present study was to compare the surgical outcomes of retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) and open retropubic radical prostatectomy (ORP).

Methods: We included patients with clinically localized prostate cancer who underwent RS-RARP or ORP and met our inclusion criteria. We compared the perioperative, oncological, and continence outcomes between both surgical approaches. Continence function was assessed using the validated International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form. Continence was defined as using 0-1 safety pad per day. Biochemical recurrence (BCR) was defined as two consecutive rises in serum PSA more than 0.2 ng/mL. Events of local recurrence, distant metastasis, and cancer death were reported and compared using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

Results: Between 1 June 2013 and 1 October 1 2016, 184 men were enrolled, of whom 125 underwent RS-RARP and 59 underwent ORP. Baseline demographic and pathological characteristics were similar between both groups (P>0.05). Patients in RS-RARP group had significantly lower blood loss, fewer transfusion rates, lower VAS score, and shorter hospital stay than patients in ORP group (P<0.05). Major complications (≥grade 3b) did not differ between both groups (P=0.121). Positive surgical margins were 28.8% and 24.8% in ORP and RS-RARP, respectively (P=0.494). The BCR free-survival rates in ORP and RS-RARP at 1-year was 87.3% and 92.3%, respectively (Log-rank, P=0.740). At 1-, 6-, and 12-month after surgery, 42.4%, 79.7%, and 84.7% of men undergoing ORP were continent, compared with 72.8%, 90.4%, and 92% undergoing RS-RARP, respectively. Men in RS-RARP group achieved faster recovery of urinary continence compared to men in ORP group (Log-rank, P=0.001).

Conclusions: RS-RARP had better perioperative outcomes and faster recovery of urinary continence compared with ORP. Short-term oncological outcomes were comparable between both surgical approaches.
Full Text
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Urology (비뇨의학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
Yonsei Authors
Rha, Koon Ho(나군호) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8588-7584
Choi, Young Deuk(최영득) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8545-5797
Ham, Won Sik(함원식) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2246-8838
사서에게 알리기


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.