The advantages of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) over laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) have rarely been investigated in randomised controlled trials.
To compare RARP and LRP in terms of the functional, perioperative, and oncologic outcomes. The main end point of the study was changes in continence 3 mo after surgery.
Design, setting, and participants
From January 2010 to January 2011, 120 patients with organ-confined prostate cancer were enrolled and randomly assigned (using a randomisation plan) to one of two groups based on surgical approach: the RARP group and the LRP group.
All RARP and LRP interventions were performed with the same technique by the same single surgeon.
Outcome measurements and statistical analysis
The demographic, perioperative, and pathologic results, such as the complications and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurements, were recorded and compared. Continence was evaluated at the time of catheter removal and 48
Results and limitations
The two groups (RARP: n
RARP provided better functional results in terms of the recovery of continence and potency. Further studies are needed to confirm our results.
Keywords: Prostate cancer, Laparoscopy, Robotic surgery, Continence, Potency.
Division of Urology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital—Orbassano (Turin), University of Turin, Turin, Italy
Corresponding author. Division of Urology, Department of Oncology, University of Turin, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Regione Gonzole 10, 10043 Orbassano (Turin), Italy. Tel. +39 0119026557; Fax: +39 0119026244.
© 2012 Published by Elsevier B.V.