Real-Life Comparative Analysis of Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy in a Single Centre Experience

被引:1
|
作者
Salciccia, Stefano [1 ]
Santarelli, Valerio [1 ]
Di Pierro, Giovanni Battista [1 ]
Del Giudice, Francesco [1 ]
Bevilacqua, Giulio [1 ]
Di Lascio, Giovanni [1 ]
Gentilucci, Alessandro [1 ]
Corvino, Roberta [1 ]
Brunelli, Valentina [1 ]
Basile, Greta [1 ]
Scornajenghi, Carlo Maria [1 ]
Santodirocco, Lorenzo [1 ]
Gobbi, Luca [1 ]
Rosati, Davide [1 ]
Moriconi, Martina [1 ]
Panebianco, Valeria [2 ]
Magliocca, Fabio Massimo [2 ]
Santini, Daniele [3 ]
Di Civita, Mattia Alberto [3 ]
Forte, Flavio [4 ]
Frisenda, Marco [4 ]
Franco, Giorgio [1 ]
Sciarra, Alessandro [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sapienza, Dept Materno Infantile & Sci Urolog, I-00161 Rome, Italy
[2] Univ Sapienza, Dept Radiol, I-00161 Rome, Italy
[3] Univ Sapienza, Dept Oncol, I-00161 Rome, Italy
[4] Vannini Hosp, Urol Div, I-00177 Rome, Italy
关键词
prostatic neoplasm; radical prostatectomy; robotic surgery; laparoscopic surgery; POSITIVE SURGICAL MARGINS; RETROPUBIC PROSTATECTOMY; URINARY CONTINENCE; ERECTILE FUNCTION; RECOVERY; CANCER; RATES;
D O I
10.3390/cancers16213604
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: The advantage of a robotic-assisted (RARP) over a laparoscopic (LRP) approach in radical prostatectomy (RP) remains to be demonstrated. Aim: The aim of the study is to use a homogeneous population in real life and single primary surgeon surgery to analyze the oncological and functional results based on the type of surgical approach and pathological features. Methods: This is a prospective trial on non-metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) patients considered after a multidisciplinary decision to conduct a RP, using a RARP or LRP approach. A real-life setting was analyzed at our Urological Departments using homogeneous criteria for the management of PCa cases and a single surgeon experience on 444 cases (284 LRP and 160 RARP). Results: Mean operating time was significantly lower in RARP (153.21 +/- 25.1 min) than in LRP (173.33 +/- 44.3 min) (p < 0.001). In cases submitted to an extended lymph node dissection (eLND), the mean number of lymph nodes removed was 15.16 +/- 7.83 and 19.83 +/- 4.78, respectively, in LRP and RARP procedures (p < 0.001), but positive lymph nodes (pN1) were similarly found in 15.8% of LRP patients and 13.6% of RARP patients (p = 0.430). Surgical margins (SM) positivity was not significantly higher in the RARP group (20.0%) when compared to the LRP group (15.9%) (p = 0.145). During the postoperative follow-up, a biochemical recurrence (BCR) was detected in 14.4% and 7.5% of cases in the LRP and RARP group, respectively, (p = 0.014). Better results of PAD tests at 3-month intervals using the RARP approach (mean pad weight 75.57 +/- 122 g and 14 +/- 42 g, respectively, in LRP and RARP (p < 0.01)) were described. Conclusions: In the comparison between the RARP and LRP approach, a clear advantage of the robotic approach is a significant reduction in operating times, days of hospitalization, and postoperative catheterization compared to laparoscopic surgery. It is not possible to describe any certain oncological advantage both in terms of surgical margins and pathological lymph nodes removed. In RARP cases a reduction to the limit of significance is described in terms of biochemical recurrence. RARP produces a more rapid recovery of urinary continence at 3 months postoperatively without significant advantages in terms of erective potency recovery.
引用
收藏
页数:35
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Robotic-assisted Radical Prostatectomy versus laparoscopic radical Prostatectomy
    Lorenz, Judith
    AKTUELLE UROLOGIE, 2022, 53 (03) : 220 - 220
  • [2] A COMPARISON OF ROBOTIC-ASSISTED VERSUS EXTRAPERITONEAL LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: A SINGLE SURGEON EXPERIENCE
    Sung, G. T.
    Kim, T. H.
    Lee, K. S.
    Ha, J. M.
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2010, 24 : A250 - A251
  • [3] A COMPARISON OF LAPAROSCOPIC AND ROBOTIC-ASSISTED LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: A SINGLE SURGEON EXPERIENCE
    Tozawa, Keiichi
    Kojima, Yoshiyuki
    Yasui, Takahiro
    Umemoto, Yukihiro
    Hamakawa, Takashi
    Kawai, Noriyasu
    Kohri, Kenjiro
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2011, 25 : A232 - A232
  • [4] Comparison of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: SP versus XI, a single surgeon experience
    Roy, Samit Sunny
    Sathe, Aditya A.
    Watson, Matthew J.
    Singh, Amar
    JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2023, 17 (06) : 2817 - 2821
  • [5] Comparison of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: SP versus XI, a single surgeon experience
    Samit Sunny Roy
    Aditya A. Sathe
    Matthew J. Watson
    Amar Singh
    Journal of Robotic Surgery, 2023, 17 (6) : 2817 - 2821
  • [6] Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: an Australian single surgeon series
    Papachristos, A.
    Basto, M.
    Te Marvelde, L.
    Moon, D.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2014, 113 : 129 - 129
  • [7] Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
    不详
    AORN JOURNAL, 2017, 106 (01) : P10 - P12
  • [8] Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy
    Agarwal, Gautum
    Valderrama, Oscar
    Luchey, Adam M.
    Pow-Sang, Julio M.
    CANCER CONTROL, 2015, 22 (03) : 283 - 290
  • [9] The preliminary experience in salvage robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
    Hsueh, Thomas Y.
    Chiu, Allen W.
    Lu, Shing-Hwa
    Skarecky, Douglas W.
    Alhering, Thomas E.
    Liss, Michael
    Pick, Donald L.
    Lee, Jason
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2010, 17 : A146 - A146
  • [10] COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF ROBOTIC-ASSISTED, LAPAROSCOPIC AND OPEN RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY
    Yu, Hua-yin
    Hevelone, Nathanael
    Lipsitz, Stuart
    Hu, Jim
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2011, 185 (04): : E716 - E717