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

Long-term comparative outcome analysis of a robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy with retropubic radical prostatectomy by a single surgeon

We aimed to report a comprehensive outcome analysis of robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomies (RALP) performed by a single surgeon and compared it to retropubic radical prostatectomies (RRP) done by the same surgeon in a high-volume center. Preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative data were collected prospectively and compared with retrospective retropubic radical prostatectomy data. Perioperative, oncological data, and functional results in the first year were compared between the two groups. There were 547 RARPs between 4th August 2011 and 31st December 2018, and 428 RRPs between 1st January 1996 and 31st December 2009 which were included in this review. While the operation time was in favour of the open group (196 vs 160 min, p < 0.01), the estimated blood loss (188 vs 316 ml, p < 0.01), blood transfusion rate (3% vs 7%, p = 0.021), hospital stay (4 days vs 7 days), and mean catheter duration (12 vs 15 days) were in favour of the robotic group. Majority of the complications belonged to Clavien-Dindo group II in both groups and the rates were not significantly different (p = 0.33). The 12-month continence rate was in favour of the RALP group (98.3% vs 99.2%, p < 0.01). Overall survival of the RALP cohort at 24 months was 99.8%, 60 months 96.1%, 84 months 87.3%, 96 months 81.3%), and 108 months was 79.5%. Overall survival at 24 months was 99.8%, 60 months 96.1%, 84 months 87.3%, 96 months 81.3%, and 108 months 79.5%. RALP is a safe, minimally invasive, technically feasible procedure with comparable functional and oncological outcomes. Our study showed superior perioperative and continence outcomes in RALP. However, despite its growing popularity, RRP still remains the gold standard in India due to its affordability and accessibility.