Robot-assisted versus pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

Francois Rozet,Justin Harmon,Xavier Cathelineau,Eric Barret,Guy Vallancien
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-006-0065-3
2006-03-17
World Journal of Urology
Abstract:The aim of this study is to report the relative advantages and disadvantages of the radical prostatectomy with a laparoscopic (LRP) and a robotic (RALP) approach. A medline search was performed. Published data regarding perioperative parameters, complications, oncological results, functional results were analyzed. Shorter learning curves have been reported with the RALP. Intra-operative and post-operative outcomes appear to be comparable between the two approaches. The average time for LRP is 234 min (151–453) versus 182 min (141–250) for RALP. Estimated blood loss for the LRP averages 482 ml (185–850) versus 234 ml (75–500) for the RALP. Complication rates in single institution studies are similar. Long-term outcomes data on PSA progression is not yet available for LRP or RALP due to their relatively short existence. RALP appears to offer a significant benefit to the laparoscopically naïve surgeon with respect to learning curve when compared to LRP. This, however, comes at an increased cost. Intra-operative and post-operative outcomes appear to be similar. Longer follow-up data is necessary to compare oncological and functional outcomes.
urology & nephrology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?