Does transition from standard to Retzius-sparing technique in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy affect the functional and oncological outcomes?

To appraise the outcomes on the Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (Rs-RARP) learning curve of a surgeon with previous experience of anterior (standard) RARP. The first 50 cases during the Rs-RARP learning curve (group 1) and 50 cases after the second 100 cases with the standard ap...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inArchivio italiano di urologia, andrologia Vol. 93; no. 4; pp. 399 - 403
Main Authors Anıl, Hakan, Karamık, Kaan, Yıldız, Ali, Savaş, Murat
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Italy PAGEPress Publications 20.12.2021
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:To appraise the outcomes on the Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (Rs-RARP) learning curve of a surgeon with previous experience of anterior (standard) RARP. The first 50 cases during the Rs-RARP learning curve (group 1) and 50 cases after the second 100 cases with the standard approach (group 2) were comprised in the study. Patients who used zero or one safety pads were considered continent. Erectile function recuperation was characterized as the competence to achieve penetrative intercourse without receiving any medication. All patients were reevaluated at two weeks, first, third, sixth, and 12th months after surgery using IIEF-5, PSA level, and continence status. Immediate continence rates following catheter removal were 32/50 (64%) in Rs-RARP group and 26/50 (52%) in S-RARP group (p = 0.224). The continence recovery rate was 48/50 (96%) in Rs-RARP group and 46/50 (92%) in the S-RARP group at 12 months follow-up (p = 0.400). Total nerve-sparing surgery was enforced in 36/50 (72%) patients for group 1 and 35/50 (70%) patients for group 2. Potency recovery was 27/43 (62.8%) in Rs-RARP and 30/44 (68.2%) for S-RARP at 12 months follow up (p = 0.597). Surgical margin positivity was detected in 6/50 (12%) cases in the Rs-RARP group and in 4/50 (8%) cases in the S-RARP (p = 0.444). Functional and oncological results are not negatively affected in the first 50 cases for a surgeon who is experienced in S-RARP before transition to the Rs-RARP method.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1124-3562
2282-4197
DOI:10.4081/aiua.2021.4.399