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] Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: an Australian single-surgeon series
    Papachristos, Alexander
    Basto, Marnique
    te Marvelde, Luc
    Moon, Daniel
    ANZ JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2015, 85 (03) : 154 - 158
  • [2] Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy
    Agarwal, Gautum
    Valderrama, Oscar
    Luchey, Adam M.
    Pow-Sang, Julio M.
    CANCER CONTROL, 2015, 22 (03) : 283 - 290
  • [3] Overcoming the Learning Curve for Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy
    Freire, Marcos P.
    Choi, Wesley W.
    Lei, Yin
    Carvas, Fernando
    Hu, Jim C.
    UROLOGIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2010, 37 (01) : 37 - +
  • [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] Comparison of Robotic-assisted versus Retropubic Radical Prostatectomy Performed by a Single Surgeon
    Ou, Yen-Chuan
    Yang, Chi-Rei
    Wang, John
    Cheng, Chen-Li
    Patel, Vipul R.
    ANTICANCER RESEARCH, 2009, 29 (05) : 1637 - 1642
  • [7] Comparison of oncological and functional outcomes of pure versus robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy performed by a single surgeon
    Park, Bumsoo
    Kim, Woojung
    Jeong, Byong Chang
    Jeon, Seong Soo
    Lee, Hyun Moo
    Choi, Han Yong
    Seo, Seong Il
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2013, 47 (01) : 10 - 18
  • [8] Robotic-assisted laparoscopic versus open salvage radical prostatectomy following radiotherapy
    Kenney, Patrick A.
    Nawaf, Cayce B.
    Mustafa, Mahmoud
    Wen, Sijin
    Wszolek, Matthew F.
    Pettaway, Curtis A.
    Ward, John F.
    Davis, John W.
    Pisters, Louis L.
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2016, 23 (03) : 8272 - 8278
  • [9] Salvage Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: Experience with 14 Cases
    Ou, Yen-Chuan
    Hung, Sheng-Chun
    Hwang, Li-Hua
    Yang, Chun-Kuang
    Hung, Siu-Wan
    Tung, Min-Che
    ANTICANCER RESEARCH, 2017, 37 (04) : 2045 - 2050
  • [10] A comparison of the robotic-assisted versus retropubic radical prostatectomy
    Laviana, A. A.
    Hu, J. C.
    MINERVA UROLOGICA E NEFROLOGICA, 2013, 65 (03) : 161 - 170