A Comparison Of Perioperative Outcome Between Robot-Assisted And Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: Experience Of A Single Institution

Feng Qi,Shangqian Wang,Haoxiang Xu,Yiren Gao,Gong Cheng,Lixin Hua
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2018.0367
2019-01-01
International braz j urol
Abstract:Purpose: To compare perioperative and pathological results in different approaches of robotic or laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 206 patients diagnosed with prostate cancer (PC) from June 2016 to October 2017 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University. A total of 132 cases underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RLRP) including 54 patients on transperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (Tp-RLRP) and 78 on extraperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (Ep-RLRP). Meanwhile, 74 patients performed with extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (Ep-LPR) were also included. Peri-operative and pathological data were compared among these groups.Results: All operations were completed without conversion. There was no significant difference in basic and pathological characteristics of patients between each two groups.In Tp-RLRP vs. Ep-RLRP: Significant differences were found in the comparison in total operation time [235.98 +/- 59.16 vs. 180.45 +/- 50.27 min, P = 0.00], estimated blood loss (EBL) [399.07 +/- 519.57 vs. 254.49 +/- 308.05 mL, P = 0.0473], postoperative pelvic drainage time [5.37 +/- 2.33 vs. 4.24 +/- 3.08 d, P = 0.0237] and postoperative length of stay [8.15 +/- 3.30 vs. 6.49 +/- 3.49 d, P = 0.0068] while no significant differences were detected in other variables.In Ep-RLRP vs. Ep-LPR: Longer total operation time was observed in Ep-RLRP when compared to Ep-LPR [180.45 +/- 50.27 vs. 143.80 +/- 33.13 min, P = 0.000]. No significant differences were observed in other variables.Conclusion: In RLRP, Ep-RLRP was proved a safe and effective approach based on the perioperative results compared to Tp-RLRP. Ep-RLRP and Ep-LPR provides equivalent perioperative and pathological outcomes.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?