Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy versus Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: A Single Surgeon's Experience

Abstract

Purpose: We compared a single surgeon’s experience with radical pro-statectomy by laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) versus robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP) with regard to pre-operative, intraoperative, and postoperative parameters. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 120 patients under-going LRP and RARP from January 2003 to December 2008. The patients were matched for age, body mass index, prostate-specific antigen, patho-logical stage, and Gleason score. Preoperative, perioperative, and post-operative data, including complications, and trifecta results (positive sur-gical margin, potency, and continence) were analyzed between the two groups. Results: The two groups were statistically similar with respect to age, body mass index, prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, and clinical stage. The RARP group showed better results in operative time, estimated blood loss, hospital stay, and bladder catheterization duration. There were no major complications, but minor complications occurred in 25.0 % versus 10.0% of cases. The trifecta results were better in the RARP group than in the LRP group. Conclusions: RARP showed excellent results in several operative para-meters compared with LRP. If the economic hurdle to RARP can be overcome, it will become the standard treatment in radical prostatectomy. (Korean J Urol 2009;50:1198-1202)