Loading…

Real-Life Comparative Analysis of Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy in a Single Centre Experience

: The advantage of a robotic-assisted (RARP) over a laparoscopic (LRP) approach in radical prostatectomy (RP) remains to be demonstrated. : The aim of the study is to use a homogeneous population in real life and single primary surgeon surgery to analyze the oncological and functional results based...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Cancers 2024-10, Vol.16 (21), p.3604
Main Authors: Salciccia, Stefano, Santarelli, Valerio, Di Pierro, Giovanni Battista, Del Giudice, Francesco, Bevilacqua, Giulio, Di Lascio, Giovanni, Gentilucci, Alessandro, Corvino, Roberta, Brunelli, Valentina, Basile, Greta, Scornajenghi, Carlo Maria, Santodirocco, Lorenzo, Gobbi, Luca, Rosati, Davide, Moriconi, Martina, Panebianco, Valeria, Magliocca, Fabio Massimo, Santini, Daniele, Di Civita, Mattia Alberto, Forte, Flavio, Frisenda, Marco, Franco, Giorgio, Sciarra, Alessandro
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-2d8213488e937eaf912ae53cf16be7a60e40c57377be75d0d0088adb341cf8e93
container_end_page
container_issue 21
container_start_page 3604
container_title Cancers
container_volume 16
creator Salciccia, Stefano
Santarelli, Valerio
Di Pierro, Giovanni Battista
Del Giudice, Francesco
Bevilacqua, Giulio
Di Lascio, Giovanni
Gentilucci, Alessandro
Corvino, Roberta
Brunelli, Valentina
Basile, Greta
Scornajenghi, Carlo Maria
Santodirocco, Lorenzo
Gobbi, Luca
Rosati, Davide
Moriconi, Martina
Panebianco, Valeria
Magliocca, Fabio Massimo
Santini, Daniele
Di Civita, Mattia Alberto
Forte, Flavio
Frisenda, Marco
Franco, Giorgio
Sciarra, Alessandro
description : The advantage of a robotic-assisted (RARP) over a laparoscopic (LRP) approach in radical prostatectomy (RP) remains to be demonstrated. : The aim of the study is to use a homogeneous population in real life and single primary surgeon surgery to analyze the oncological and functional results based on the type of surgical approach and pathological features. : This is a prospective trial on non-metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) patients considered after a multidisciplinary decision to conduct a RP, using a RARP or LRP approach. A real-life setting was analyzed at our Urological Departments using homogeneous criteria for the management of PCa cases and a single surgeon experience on 444 cases (284 LRP and 160 RARP). : Mean operating time was significantly lower in RARP (153.21 ± 25.1 min) than in LRP (173.33 ± 44.3 min) ( < 0.001). In cases submitted to an extended lymph node dissection (eLND), the mean number of lymph nodes removed was 15.16 ± 7.83 and 19.83 ± 4.78, respectively, in LRP and RARP procedures ( < 0.001), but positive lymph nodes (pN1) were similarly found in 15.8% of LRP patients and 13.6% of RARP patients ( = 0.430). Surgical margins (SM) positivity was not significantly higher in the RARP group (20.0%) when compared to the LRP group (15.9%) ( = 0.145). During the postoperative follow-up, a biochemical recurrence (BCR) was detected in 14.4% and 7.5% of cases in the LRP and RARP group, respectively, ( = 0.014). Better results of PAD tests at 3-month intervals using the RARP approach (mean pad weight 75.57 ± 122 g and 14 ± 42 g, respectively, in LRP and RARP ( < 0.01)) were described. : In the comparison between the RARP and LRP approach, a clear advantage of the robotic approach is a significant reduction in operating times, days of hospitalization, and postoperative catheterization compared to laparoscopic surgery. It is not possible to describe any certain oncological advantage both in terms of surgical margins and pathological lymph nodes removed. In RARP cases a reduction to the limit of significance is described in terms of biochemical recurrence. RARP produces a more rapid recovery of urinary continence at 3 months postoperatively without significant advantages in terms of erective potency recovery.
doi_str_mv 10.3390/cancers16213604
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11545600</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A815344312</galeid><sourcerecordid>A815344312</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-2d8213488e937eaf912ae53cf16be7a60e40c57377be75d0d0088adb341cf8e93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkk1v1DAQhi0EotXSMzdkiQuXtHbsxMkJrVaFIq0EWj6u1qwzWVw5cYiTqsuvZ7Ytpa2wD7bHzzszHg9jr6U4VaoWZw56h2OSZS5VKfQzdpwLk2dlWevnD_ZH7CSlS0FDKWlK85IdqbqQldD6mP3eIIRs7Vvkq9gNMMLkr5Avewj75BOPLd_EbZy8y5aJDBM2_AcFnRNfA-ExuTh4xzfQeAeBfyHLBBO6KXZ77nsO_Kvvd4HcYz-NyM-vBxw9Uuav2IsWQsKTu3XBvn84_7a6yNafP35aLdeZU0ZNWd5U9D5dVVgrg9DWMgcslGtluUUDpUAtXGGUMXQsGtEIUVXQbJWWrj2IFuz9rd9h3nbYuEMeEOww-g7GvY3g7eOb3v-0u3hlpSx0UVLZFuzdnYcx_poxTbbzyWEI0GOck1Uyr4xWeV4Q-vYJehnnkap5QxV1XSpZ_aN2END6vo0U2B2c2mUlC6U1wUSd_oei2WDnXeyx9WR_JDi7FTj6hTRie_9IKeyhZeyTliHFm4e1uef_Noj6AxTPvdM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3125996318</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Real-Life Comparative Analysis of Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy in a Single Centre Experience</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Salciccia, Stefano ; Santarelli, Valerio ; Di Pierro, Giovanni Battista ; Del Giudice, Francesco ; Bevilacqua, Giulio ; Di Lascio, Giovanni ; Gentilucci, Alessandro ; Corvino, Roberta ; Brunelli, Valentina ; Basile, Greta ; Scornajenghi, Carlo Maria ; Santodirocco, Lorenzo ; Gobbi, Luca ; Rosati, Davide ; Moriconi, Martina ; Panebianco, Valeria ; Magliocca, Fabio Massimo ; Santini, Daniele ; Di Civita, Mattia Alberto ; Forte, Flavio ; Frisenda, Marco ; Franco, Giorgio ; Sciarra, Alessandro</creator><creatorcontrib>Salciccia, Stefano ; Santarelli, Valerio ; Di Pierro, Giovanni Battista ; Del Giudice, Francesco ; Bevilacqua, Giulio ; Di Lascio, Giovanni ; Gentilucci, Alessandro ; Corvino, Roberta ; Brunelli, Valentina ; Basile, Greta ; Scornajenghi, Carlo Maria ; Santodirocco, Lorenzo ; Gobbi, Luca ; Rosati, Davide ; Moriconi, Martina ; Panebianco, Valeria ; Magliocca, Fabio Massimo ; Santini, Daniele ; Di Civita, Mattia Alberto ; Forte, Flavio ; Frisenda, Marco ; Franco, Giorgio ; Sciarra, Alessandro</creatorcontrib><description>: The advantage of a robotic-assisted (RARP) over a laparoscopic (LRP) approach in radical prostatectomy (RP) remains to be demonstrated. : The aim of the study is to use a homogeneous population in real life and single primary surgeon surgery to analyze the oncological and functional results based on the type of surgical approach and pathological features. : This is a prospective trial on non-metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) patients considered after a multidisciplinary decision to conduct a RP, using a RARP or LRP approach. A real-life setting was analyzed at our Urological Departments using homogeneous criteria for the management of PCa cases and a single surgeon experience on 444 cases (284 LRP and 160 RARP). : Mean operating time was significantly lower in RARP (153.21 ± 25.1 min) than in LRP (173.33 ± 44.3 min) ( &lt; 0.001). In cases submitted to an extended lymph node dissection (eLND), the mean number of lymph nodes removed was 15.16 ± 7.83 and 19.83 ± 4.78, respectively, in LRP and RARP procedures ( &lt; 0.001), but positive lymph nodes (pN1) were similarly found in 15.8% of LRP patients and 13.6% of RARP patients ( = 0.430). Surgical margins (SM) positivity was not significantly higher in the RARP group (20.0%) when compared to the LRP group (15.9%) ( = 0.145). During the postoperative follow-up, a biochemical recurrence (BCR) was detected in 14.4% and 7.5% of cases in the LRP and RARP group, respectively, ( = 0.014). Better results of PAD tests at 3-month intervals using the RARP approach (mean pad weight 75.57 ± 122 g and 14 ± 42 g, respectively, in LRP and RARP ( &lt; 0.01)) were described. : In the comparison between the RARP and LRP approach, a clear advantage of the robotic approach is a significant reduction in operating times, days of hospitalization, and postoperative catheterization compared to laparoscopic surgery. It is not possible to describe any certain oncological advantage both in terms of surgical margins and pathological lymph nodes removed. In RARP cases a reduction to the limit of significance is described in terms of biochemical recurrence. RARP produces a more rapid recovery of urinary continence at 3 months postoperatively without significant advantages in terms of erective potency recovery.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2072-6694</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2072-6694</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/cancers16213604</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39518044</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Switzerland: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Biopsy ; Clinical medicine ; Comparative analysis ; Laparoscopic surgery ; Laparoscopy ; Lymph nodes ; Lymphatic system ; Medical imaging ; Metastasis ; Nomograms ; Patients ; Prostate cancer ; Prostatectomy ; Radiation therapy ; Robotic surgery ; Robotics ; Statistical analysis ; Surgeons ; Surgery ; Surgical anastomosis</subject><ispartof>Cancers, 2024-10, Vol.16 (21), p.3604</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2024 MDPI AG</rights><rights>2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2024 by the authors. 2024</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-2d8213488e937eaf912ae53cf16be7a60e40c57377be75d0d0088adb341cf8e93</cites><orcidid>0009-0009-3013-2622 ; 0000-0003-4873-3257 ; 0000-0002-8225-1174 ; 0000-0003-3865-5988 ; 0000-0002-7899-8056 ; 0000-0001-7600-7434</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/3125996318/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/3125996318?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,25753,27924,27925,37012,37013,44590,53791,53793,75126</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39518044$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Salciccia, Stefano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Santarelli, Valerio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Pierro, Giovanni Battista</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Del Giudice, Francesco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bevilacqua, Giulio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Lascio, Giovanni</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gentilucci, Alessandro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Corvino, Roberta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brunelli, Valentina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Basile, Greta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scornajenghi, Carlo Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Santodirocco, Lorenzo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gobbi, Luca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rosati, Davide</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moriconi, Martina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Panebianco, Valeria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Magliocca, Fabio Massimo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Santini, Daniele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Civita, Mattia Alberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Forte, Flavio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frisenda, Marco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Franco, Giorgio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sciarra, Alessandro</creatorcontrib><title>Real-Life Comparative Analysis of Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy in a Single Centre Experience</title><title>Cancers</title><addtitle>Cancers (Basel)</addtitle><description>: The advantage of a robotic-assisted (RARP) over a laparoscopic (LRP) approach in radical prostatectomy (RP) remains to be demonstrated. : The aim of the study is to use a homogeneous population in real life and single primary surgeon surgery to analyze the oncological and functional results based on the type of surgical approach and pathological features. : This is a prospective trial on non-metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) patients considered after a multidisciplinary decision to conduct a RP, using a RARP or LRP approach. A real-life setting was analyzed at our Urological Departments using homogeneous criteria for the management of PCa cases and a single surgeon experience on 444 cases (284 LRP and 160 RARP). : Mean operating time was significantly lower in RARP (153.21 ± 25.1 min) than in LRP (173.33 ± 44.3 min) ( &lt; 0.001). In cases submitted to an extended lymph node dissection (eLND), the mean number of lymph nodes removed was 15.16 ± 7.83 and 19.83 ± 4.78, respectively, in LRP and RARP procedures ( &lt; 0.001), but positive lymph nodes (pN1) were similarly found in 15.8% of LRP patients and 13.6% of RARP patients ( = 0.430). Surgical margins (SM) positivity was not significantly higher in the RARP group (20.0%) when compared to the LRP group (15.9%) ( = 0.145). During the postoperative follow-up, a biochemical recurrence (BCR) was detected in 14.4% and 7.5% of cases in the LRP and RARP group, respectively, ( = 0.014). Better results of PAD tests at 3-month intervals using the RARP approach (mean pad weight 75.57 ± 122 g and 14 ± 42 g, respectively, in LRP and RARP ( &lt; 0.01)) were described. : In the comparison between the RARP and LRP approach, a clear advantage of the robotic approach is a significant reduction in operating times, days of hospitalization, and postoperative catheterization compared to laparoscopic surgery. It is not possible to describe any certain oncological advantage both in terms of surgical margins and pathological lymph nodes removed. In RARP cases a reduction to the limit of significance is described in terms of biochemical recurrence. RARP produces a more rapid recovery of urinary continence at 3 months postoperatively without significant advantages in terms of erective potency recovery.</description><subject>Biopsy</subject><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Laparoscopic surgery</subject><subject>Laparoscopy</subject><subject>Lymph nodes</subject><subject>Lymphatic system</subject><subject>Medical imaging</subject><subject>Metastasis</subject><subject>Nomograms</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Prostate cancer</subject><subject>Prostatectomy</subject><subject>Radiation therapy</subject><subject>Robotic surgery</subject><subject>Robotics</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Surgeons</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical anastomosis</subject><issn>2072-6694</issn><issn>2072-6694</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><recordid>eNptkk1v1DAQhi0EotXSMzdkiQuXtHbsxMkJrVaFIq0EWj6u1qwzWVw5cYiTqsuvZ7Ytpa2wD7bHzzszHg9jr6U4VaoWZw56h2OSZS5VKfQzdpwLk2dlWevnD_ZH7CSlS0FDKWlK85IdqbqQldD6mP3eIIRs7Vvkq9gNMMLkr5Avewj75BOPLd_EbZy8y5aJDBM2_AcFnRNfA-ExuTh4xzfQeAeBfyHLBBO6KXZ77nsO_Kvvd4HcYz-NyM-vBxw9Uuav2IsWQsKTu3XBvn84_7a6yNafP35aLdeZU0ZNWd5U9D5dVVgrg9DWMgcslGtluUUDpUAtXGGUMXQsGtEIUVXQbJWWrj2IFuz9rd9h3nbYuEMeEOww-g7GvY3g7eOb3v-0u3hlpSx0UVLZFuzdnYcx_poxTbbzyWEI0GOck1Uyr4xWeV4Q-vYJehnnkap5QxV1XSpZ_aN2END6vo0U2B2c2mUlC6U1wUSd_oei2WDnXeyx9WR_JDi7FTj6hTRie_9IKeyhZeyTliHFm4e1uef_Noj6AxTPvdM</recordid><startdate>20241025</startdate><enddate>20241025</enddate><creator>Salciccia, Stefano</creator><creator>Santarelli, Valerio</creator><creator>Di Pierro, Giovanni Battista</creator><creator>Del Giudice, Francesco</creator><creator>Bevilacqua, Giulio</creator><creator>Di Lascio, Giovanni</creator><creator>Gentilucci, Alessandro</creator><creator>Corvino, Roberta</creator><creator>Brunelli, Valentina</creator><creator>Basile, Greta</creator><creator>Scornajenghi, Carlo Maria</creator><creator>Santodirocco, Lorenzo</creator><creator>Gobbi, Luca</creator><creator>Rosati, Davide</creator><creator>Moriconi, Martina</creator><creator>Panebianco, Valeria</creator><creator>Magliocca, Fabio Massimo</creator><creator>Santini, Daniele</creator><creator>Di Civita, Mattia Alberto</creator><creator>Forte, Flavio</creator><creator>Frisenda, Marco</creator><creator>Franco, Giorgio</creator><creator>Sciarra, Alessandro</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><general>MDPI</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TO</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0009-3013-2622</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4873-3257</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8225-1174</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3865-5988</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7899-8056</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7600-7434</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20241025</creationdate><title>Real-Life Comparative Analysis of Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy in a Single Centre Experience</title><author>Salciccia, Stefano ; Santarelli, Valerio ; Di Pierro, Giovanni Battista ; Del Giudice, Francesco ; Bevilacqua, Giulio ; Di Lascio, Giovanni ; Gentilucci, Alessandro ; Corvino, Roberta ; Brunelli, Valentina ; Basile, Greta ; Scornajenghi, Carlo Maria ; Santodirocco, Lorenzo ; Gobbi, Luca ; Rosati, Davide ; Moriconi, Martina ; Panebianco, Valeria ; Magliocca, Fabio Massimo ; Santini, Daniele ; Di Civita, Mattia Alberto ; Forte, Flavio ; Frisenda, Marco ; Franco, Giorgio ; Sciarra, Alessandro</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-2d8213488e937eaf912ae53cf16be7a60e40c57377be75d0d0088adb341cf8e93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Biopsy</topic><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Laparoscopic surgery</topic><topic>Laparoscopy</topic><topic>Lymph nodes</topic><topic>Lymphatic system</topic><topic>Medical imaging</topic><topic>Metastasis</topic><topic>Nomograms</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Prostate cancer</topic><topic>Prostatectomy</topic><topic>Radiation therapy</topic><topic>Robotic surgery</topic><topic>Robotics</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Surgeons</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical anastomosis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Salciccia, Stefano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Santarelli, Valerio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Pierro, Giovanni Battista</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Del Giudice, Francesco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bevilacqua, Giulio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Lascio, Giovanni</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gentilucci, Alessandro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Corvino, Roberta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brunelli, Valentina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Basile, Greta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scornajenghi, Carlo Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Santodirocco, Lorenzo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gobbi, Luca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rosati, Davide</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moriconi, Martina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Panebianco, Valeria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Magliocca, Fabio Massimo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Santini, Daniele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Civita, Mattia Alberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Forte, Flavio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frisenda, Marco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Franco, Giorgio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sciarra, Alessandro</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Oncogenes and Growth Factors Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Databases</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Biological Sciences</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Cancers</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Salciccia, Stefano</au><au>Santarelli, Valerio</au><au>Di Pierro, Giovanni Battista</au><au>Del Giudice, Francesco</au><au>Bevilacqua, Giulio</au><au>Di Lascio, Giovanni</au><au>Gentilucci, Alessandro</au><au>Corvino, Roberta</au><au>Brunelli, Valentina</au><au>Basile, Greta</au><au>Scornajenghi, Carlo Maria</au><au>Santodirocco, Lorenzo</au><au>Gobbi, Luca</au><au>Rosati, Davide</au><au>Moriconi, Martina</au><au>Panebianco, Valeria</au><au>Magliocca, Fabio Massimo</au><au>Santini, Daniele</au><au>Di Civita, Mattia Alberto</au><au>Forte, Flavio</au><au>Frisenda, Marco</au><au>Franco, Giorgio</au><au>Sciarra, Alessandro</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Real-Life Comparative Analysis of Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy in a Single Centre Experience</atitle><jtitle>Cancers</jtitle><addtitle>Cancers (Basel)</addtitle><date>2024-10-25</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>21</issue><spage>3604</spage><pages>3604-</pages><issn>2072-6694</issn><eissn>2072-6694</eissn><abstract>: The advantage of a robotic-assisted (RARP) over a laparoscopic (LRP) approach in radical prostatectomy (RP) remains to be demonstrated. : The aim of the study is to use a homogeneous population in real life and single primary surgeon surgery to analyze the oncological and functional results based on the type of surgical approach and pathological features. : This is a prospective trial on non-metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) patients considered after a multidisciplinary decision to conduct a RP, using a RARP or LRP approach. A real-life setting was analyzed at our Urological Departments using homogeneous criteria for the management of PCa cases and a single surgeon experience on 444 cases (284 LRP and 160 RARP). : Mean operating time was significantly lower in RARP (153.21 ± 25.1 min) than in LRP (173.33 ± 44.3 min) ( &lt; 0.001). In cases submitted to an extended lymph node dissection (eLND), the mean number of lymph nodes removed was 15.16 ± 7.83 and 19.83 ± 4.78, respectively, in LRP and RARP procedures ( &lt; 0.001), but positive lymph nodes (pN1) were similarly found in 15.8% of LRP patients and 13.6% of RARP patients ( = 0.430). Surgical margins (SM) positivity was not significantly higher in the RARP group (20.0%) when compared to the LRP group (15.9%) ( = 0.145). During the postoperative follow-up, a biochemical recurrence (BCR) was detected in 14.4% and 7.5% of cases in the LRP and RARP group, respectively, ( = 0.014). Better results of PAD tests at 3-month intervals using the RARP approach (mean pad weight 75.57 ± 122 g and 14 ± 42 g, respectively, in LRP and RARP ( &lt; 0.01)) were described. : In the comparison between the RARP and LRP approach, a clear advantage of the robotic approach is a significant reduction in operating times, days of hospitalization, and postoperative catheterization compared to laparoscopic surgery. It is not possible to describe any certain oncological advantage both in terms of surgical margins and pathological lymph nodes removed. In RARP cases a reduction to the limit of significance is described in terms of biochemical recurrence. RARP produces a more rapid recovery of urinary continence at 3 months postoperatively without significant advantages in terms of erective potency recovery.</abstract><cop>Switzerland</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><pmid>39518044</pmid><doi>10.3390/cancers16213604</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0009-3013-2622</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4873-3257</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8225-1174</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3865-5988</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7899-8056</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7600-7434</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2072-6694
ispartof Cancers, 2024-10, Vol.16 (21), p.3604
issn 2072-6694
2072-6694
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11545600
source Publicly Available Content Database; PubMed Central
subjects Biopsy
Clinical medicine
Comparative analysis
Laparoscopic surgery
Laparoscopy
Lymph nodes
Lymphatic system
Medical imaging
Metastasis
Nomograms
Patients
Prostate cancer
Prostatectomy
Radiation therapy
Robotic surgery
Robotics
Statistical analysis
Surgeons
Surgery
Surgical anastomosis
title Real-Life Comparative Analysis of Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy in a Single Centre Experience
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-23T18%3A29%3A43IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Real-Life%20Comparative%20Analysis%20of%20Robotic-Assisted%20Versus%20Laparoscopic%20Radical%20Prostatectomy%20in%20a%20Single%20Centre%20Experience&rft.jtitle=Cancers&rft.au=Salciccia,%20Stefano&rft.date=2024-10-25&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=21&rft.spage=3604&rft.pages=3604-&rft.issn=2072-6694&rft.eissn=2072-6694&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/cancers16213604&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA815344312%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-2d8213488e937eaf912ae53cf16be7a60e40c57377be75d0d0088adb341cf8e93%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3125996318&rft_id=info:pmid/39518044&rft_galeid=A815344312&rfr_iscdi=true