Is Comparison of Robotic to Open Radical Prostatectomy Still Relevant?

Comparison of robotic and open radical prostatectomy: Initial experience of a single surgeon

Objective:

In this study, we aimed to make a comprehensive comparison of the first hundred robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) cases of a single surgeon in a high-volume center.

Methods:

Preoperative, perioperative and postoperative data were collected retrospectively. Perioperative, oncological data and functional results in the first year were compared between the two groups. There were 204 RARPs between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2019, and 755 RRPs between April 1, 2007 and December 31, 2019.

Results:

While the operation time was in favor of the open group (117 vs 188 min, p<0.001), the estimated blood loss (328 vs 150 ml, p<0.001), blood transfusion rate (12 vs 2, p=0.021), and re-operation rate (6 vs 0, p=0.001) were in favor of the robotic group. Mean length of hospital stay (5.4 vs 3.1, p<0.001), urine leak rate (11 vs 2, p=0.033), complication rate (37 vs 16, p=0.018), and the 12th month continence rate (67 vs 85, p=0.002) were better in the robotic group.

Conclusions:

RARP may provide better perioperative outcomes and lower complication rates after the surgeon factor is eliminated in the early period. Since our case group includes the initial 100 patients, studies with larger patient groups with longer follow-up are needed to adapt these early results to general outcomes.