Prospective randomized study of radiofrequency versus ultrasound scalpels on functional outcomes of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Surgical treatment of patients with prostate cancer currently involves laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) or robot-assisted LRP. Continence and nerve-sparing procedures in these techniques are supported by dissection and hemostatic surgical devices powered by different types of energy. The aim of this study was to assess recovery of continence and erectile function after laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy comparing two surgical devices for dissection and hemostasis-radiofrequency (RF) and ultrasound (US) scalpels.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 132 men with localized prostate cancer were prospectively enrolled and scheduled for extraperitoneal LRP. Patients were randomly assigned to the RF group (LigaSure; n=66) or the US group (UltraCision; n=66). Outcomes were measured by the self-administered questionnaires (International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence [ICIQ-UI] and International Index of Erectile Function 5 [IIEF 5]) 15 days before surgery, 90 and 180 days after prostatectomy to assess recovery of urinary continence and erectile function.

RESULTS

No significant difference was found between the two groups regarding operative time, intra- and perioperative complications, or time of hospital stay. At 180 days after surgery, patients in the RF-treated group showed better recovery in terms of continence and erectile function compared with patients in the US group (ICIQ-UI: p=0.0016; IIEF 5: p=0.0352).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the RF scalpel provided better functional outcomes compared with the US scalpel in patients undergoing extraperitoneal LRP. This might be attributed to the low contiguous damage of those tissues, which are not directly involved in dissection and hemostasis, achieved using the RF device.