Extraperitoneal Approach for Robotic-assisted Simple Prostatectomy

Individualized positive end-expiratory pressure guided by driving pressure in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial

Background

Despite the widespread use of lung-protective ventilation in general anesthesia, the optimal positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) remains uncertain. This study aimed to investigate the effects of driving pressure-guided individualized PEEP in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Methods

Forty-two male patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy were randomized to receive conventional fixed PEEP of 5 cmH2O (n = 21, PEEP5) or driving pressure-guided individualized PEEP (n = 21, PEEPIND). The primary outcome was the ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2). The secondary outcomes included respiratory mechanics, hemodynamics, optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD), and the incidence of postoperative delirium (POD) and postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) within a 7-day period.

Results

In comparison with the PEEP5 group, the PEEPIND group showed significantly higher (p < 0.001) PEEP values during pneumoperitoneum in the Trendelenburg position (mean [standard deviation], 11.29 cmH2O [1.01 cmH2O]) and after deflation and repositioning to the supine position (mean [standard deviation], 7.05 cmH2O [1.20 cmH2O]). The PaO2/FiO2 values in the PEEPIND group were significantly higher than those in the PEEP5 group 120 min after pneumoperitoneum in the Trendelenburg position (p = 0.023) and at the end of the operation (p = 0.028). The groups showed no differences in ONSD, hemodynamics, and incidence of POD and PPCs (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

In comparison with a fixed PEEP of 5 cmH2O, driving pressure-guided individualized PEEP improves intraoperative respiratory mechanics and oxygenation without causing deterioration in hemodynamics, further escalation in intracranial pressure, or an increase in the incidence of POD. Nevertheless, this procedure requires meticulous monitoring. Unfortunately, individualized PEEP did not result in a reduction in the incidence of PPCs in this study.

Clinical Trial Registration

http://www.chictr.org.cn, ChiCTR2400081338.

Mechanical power during robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: an observational study

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) requires pneumoperitoneum and steep Trendelenburg position. Our aim was to investigate the influence of the combination of pneumoperitoneum and Trendelenburg position on mechanical power and its components during RALP.

METHODS

Sixty-one prospectively enrolled patients scheduled for RALP were studied in supine position before surgery, during pneumoperitoneum and Trendelenburg position and in supine position after surgery at constant ventilatory setting. In a subgroup of 17 patients the response to increasing positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) from 5 to 10 cmH2O was studied.

RESULTS

The application of pneumoperitoneum and Trendelenburg position increased the total mechanical power (13.8 [11.6 - 15.5] vs 9.2 [7.5 - 11.7] J/min, p < 0.001) and its elastic and resistive components compared to supine position before surgery. In supine position after surgery the total mechanical power and its elastic component decreased but remained higher compared to supine position before surgery. Increasing PEEP from 5 to 10 cmH2O within each timepoint significantly increased the total mechanical power (supine position before surgery: 9.8 [8.4 - 10.4] vs 12.1 [11.4 - 14.2] J/min, p < 0.001; pneumoperitoneum and Trendelenburg position: 13.8 [12.2 - 14.3] vs 15.5 [15.0 - 16.7] J/min, p < 0.001; supine position after surgery: 10.2 [9.4 - 10.7] vs 12.7 [12.0 - 13.6] J/min, p < 0.001), without affecting respiratory system elastance.

CONCLUSION

Mechanical power in healthy patients undergoing RALP significantly increased both during the pneumoperitoneum and Trendelenburg position and in supine position after surgery. PEEP always increased mechanical power without ameliorating the respiratory system elastance.

Individualized PEEP without Recruitment Maneuvers Improves Intraoperative Oxygenation: A Randomized Controlled Study

Individualized positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) combined with recruitment maneuvers improves intraoperative oxygenation in individuals undergoing robot-assisted prostatectomy. However, whether electrical impedance tomography (EIT)-guided individualized PEEP without recruitment maneuvers can also improve intraoperative oxygenation is unknown. To test this, fifty-six male patients undergoing elective robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy were randomly assigned to either individualized PEEP (Group PEEPIND, n = 28) or a control with a fixed PEEP of 5 cm H2O (Group PEEP5, n = 28). Individualized PEEP was guided by EIT after placing the patients in the Trendelenburg position and performing intraperitoneal insufflation. Patients in Group PEEPIND maintained individualized PEEP without intermittent recruitment maneuvers, and those in Group PEEP5 maintained a PEEP of 5 cm H2O intraoperatively. Both groups were extubated in a semi-sitting position once the extubation criteria were met. The primary outcome was arterial oxygen partial pressure (PaO2)/inspiratory oxygen fraction (FiO2) prior to extubation. Other outcomes included intraoperative driving pressure, plateau pressure and dynamic, respiratory system compliance, and the incidence of postoperative hypoxemia in the post-operative care unit (PACU). Our results showed that the intraoperative median for PEEPIND was 16 cm H2O (ranging from 12 to 18 cm H2O). EIT-guided PEEPIND was associated with higher PaO2/FiO2 before extubation compared to PEEP5 (71.6 ± 10.7 vs. 56.8 ± 14.1 kPa, p = 0.003). Improved oxygenation extended into the PACU with a lower incidence of postoperative hypoxemia (3.8% vs. 26.9%, p = 0.021). Additionally, PEEPIND was associated with lower driving pressures (12.0 ± 3.0 vs. 15.0 ± 4.4 cm H2O, p = 0.044) and better compliance (44.5 ± 12.8 vs. 33.6 ± 9.1 mL/cm H2O, p = 0.017). Our data indicated that individualized PEEP guided by EIT without intraoperative recruitment maneuvers also improved perioperative oxygenation in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, which could benefit patients with the risk of intraoperative hemodynamic instability caused by recruitment maneuvers. Trial registration: China Clinical Trial Registration Center Identifier: ChiCTR2100053839. This study was registered on 1 December 2021. The first patient was recruited on 15 December 2021.

Standard Multi-Port versus Single-Port Robot‑Assisted Simple Prostatectomy: A Single Center Initial Experience

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) has emerged as a safe surgical treatment for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia with large glands (>80 ml). Several studies reported on perioperative outcomes of RASP by the standard multiport (MP) da Vinci robotic system approach. Studies conducted on RASP utilizing the novel single-port da Vinci® SP robotic platform (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA) are scarce. We aimed to compare intraoperative and short-term postoperative outcomes between the da Vinci MP and SP robots for patients undergoing RASP in a referral center.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we reviewed all patients who underwent RASP using MP or SP robot from September, 2016 to March, 2021. Intraoperative data, overall 30-day complications, complications by Clavien-Dindo classification and 90-day readmission and reoperation rates were assessed and compared between the two groups using appropriate statistical methods.

RESULTS

Seventy-five patients who underwent RASP were identified. Of these, 47 were in the MP group and 28 were in the SP. Compared to SP, mean operative time in MP group was 216.6 vs. 232.4 minutes (p=0.39), EBL was 195.7 vs. 227.1 ml (p=0.43) and length of stay was 2 vs. 2.5 days (p=0.45). There was a trend toward higher overall complication rate in SP group vs. MP (42.86% vs. 21.28%, p=0.09). There were no significant differences in the readmission (17.02% vs. 10.71%, p=0.52) and reoperation (2.1% vs. 7.14%, p=0.34) rates between MP vs. SP group.

CONCLUSION

SP-RASP is safe and shows equivalent perioperative outcomes when compared to the MP robotic system. A marginal increase of complication rate was recorded in the SP group; however, this did not demonstrate statistical significance.

Multicentric comparative analysis of Retzius versus Retzius sparing robotic assisted simple prostatectomy in the management of large prostate glands

AIM

Robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) is a minimally invasive alternative to open simple prostatectomy in the management of patients with large prostate glands suffering from moderate-to-severe lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Our study aimed to evaluate two transvesical robotic approaches in order to compare functional outcomes and postoperative complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Clinical data from 111 consecutive patients from three tertiary robotic centers were retrospectively collected. Patients were divided into two groups depending on the surgical approach: 58 Retzius sparing and 53 Retzius approach RASP. We evaluated peri-operative outcomes (operating time, blood loss, transfusion rate, length of hospital stay), as well as intra-operative and early complications using a Clavien Dindo scale. Fisher's exact test, chi-square test and Mann-Whitney U test were applied for statistical analyses. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Neither subgroup differed significantly in age (p = 0.104), Charlson comorbidity index (p = 0.088) or prostate volume (p = 0.507), total IPSS score (0.763) and Q_max (p = 0.651). Total complication rates were lower for the Retzius approach subgroup (19 vs 11.9%) without reaching statistical significance in multivariate analysis (HR = 1.21, 95% CI = 0.17 - 8.44, p = 0.84). No significant differences based on IPSS total score and Q_max could be observed between the two subgroups during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Both RASP approaches provide similar results in terms of functional outcomes and present a good safety profile in the management of large prostatic adenomas. Larger trials are needed in order to establish the indications for each robotic technique.

Extra-peritoneal Laparoscopic Resection of Benign Prostate Adenoma >150 CC with preservation of posterior wall of prostatic urethra: Dundee Technique and early outcomes

BACKGROUND

There are limited options for men with large benign prostates (>150cc) and bladder outflow obstruction due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Management options include surgery (open or minimal access) and endoscopic procedures. There is a paucity of literature on outcomes for prostates >150cc.

METHODS

In this case series we describe a step-by-step, illustrated, modified extra-peritoneal technique of laparoscopic prostatectomy with preservation of the posterior prostatic urethra. This involves creation of extra-peritoneal space, transverse incision of prostate capsule, progressive adenoma dissection, resection, and closure of the capsule.

RESULTS

Ten patients underwent this procedure between 2015 and 2019. The mean age was 72.4 years and mean prostate size was 215.5cc. Mean procedure duration was 200 min and there were no intraoperative complications. Most patients were discharged on postoperative day 1. Mean intraoperative blood loss was 120 ml with no patient requiring blood transfusion. At follow up (mean 37 months) no patients had residual symptoms of BPH.

CONCLUSION

We describe a novel extraperitoneal laparoscopic technique for benign prostates of >150cc with very good outcomes. The transferability of this technique to centres with laparoscopic expertise at minimal extra cost and future adaptability in the robotic setting are some of the advantages of this technique.

From open simple to robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) for large benign prostate hyperplasia: the time has come

PURPOSE

Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) has recently been studied as an alternative to open simple prostatectomy or endoscopic treatment options. At present, there is no defined recommendation for a robotic procedure as a standard surgical technique to treat large benign prostate hyperplasia.

METHODS

Several robotic techniques have been described since 2007. Contemporaneously, multiple endoscopic enucleation techniques have been proposed. Nevertheless, open simple prostatectomy still remains a mainstay of therapy. We aimed to evaluate the development of robotic-assisted prostatectomy for large benign prostatic obstruction, thus comparing the technical aspects and clinical outcomes with open and endoscopic enucleation.

RESULTS

Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy provides significantly less blood loss and shorter hospital stay but longer operative time compared to open simple prostatectomy. Compared to endoscopic treatments, robotic approaches have a similar perioperative outcome, but cause less urethral trauma or potential bladder neck strictures. Moreover, concomitant bladder pathologies can be treated within the same setting.

CONCLUSION

Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy is an effective and safe technique, and can hence be considered to become the preferred first-line therapy to treat patients with obstructive large prostate glands.

Robotic-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review

Contemporary minimally invasive surgical (MIS) treatment options of patients with male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS) in men with prostate glands >80 mL include Holmium Laser Enucleation Prostate (HoLEP), Thulium laser VapoEnucleation Prostate (ThuVEP), and Laparoscopic (LSP) or Robotic-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy (RASP). Implementing new laser technologies is costly, and the steep learning curve of these laser techniques limit their wide range use. This promoted the use of LSP and RASP in centers with readily established laparoscopy or robotic surgery programs. The aim of this study is to review case and comparative series of RASP. We systematically reviewed published data from 2008 to 2020 on RASP and have identified 26 non-comparative and 9 comparative case series. RASP has longer operation time but less time spent in hospital and less blood loss. The outcomes of improvements in symptom score, post-voiding residual urine (PVR), postoperative PSA decline, complications, and cost are similar when compared to open and laser enucleation techniques. These outcomes position RASP as a viable MIS treatment option for patients with male LUTS needing surgical treatment for enlarged prostates. Nevertheless, prospective, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with multicenter and large sample size are needed to confirm the findings of this systematic review.

Intermediate-term Urinary Function and Complication Outcomes After Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy

OBJECTIVE

To assess the incidence of delayed complications after robot-assisted simple prostatectomy and evaluate postoperative lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) as a function of time with intermediate-term follow-up.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 150 patients who underwent robot-assisted simple prostatectomy between May, 2013 and January, 2019. Indication for surgery was bothersome LUTS refractory to medical management and prostate volume ≥80 milliliters. The severity of LUTS was assessed using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and quality of life (QOL) score. One-way analysis of variance test with post hoc Tukey's honest significant difference test was used to compare postoperative IPSS and QOL scores as a function of time; P <.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

At a mean ± SD follow up of 31.3 ± 18.2 months, none of the patients developed a bladder neck contracture and none of the patients required reoperation for LUTS. Postoperatively, IPSS and QOL scores decreased with an increasing duration of follow up (P <.001). Mean IPSS and QOL scores improved between 2 weeks and 3 months postoperatively (P = .027 and P = .006, respectively). After 3 months postoperatively, mean IPPS and QOL scores stabilized and remained unchanged up to 36 months of follow-up (all P >.05).

CONCLUSION

Robotic simple prostatectomy is associated with a low incidence of delayed complications at a mean of 31.3 months postoperatively. After robotic simple prostatectomy, urinary function outcomes improve in the early postoperative period with maximal improvement occurring at 3 months. Excellent urinary function outcomes are durable up to at least 36 months postoperatively.

Expanding the indications of robotic surgery in urology: A systematic review of the literature

Objectives

To evaluate the recent developments in robotic urological surgery, as the introduction of robotic technology has overcome many of the difficulties of pure laparoscopic surgery enabling surgeons to perform complex minimally invasive procedures with a shorter learning curve. Robot-assisted surgery (RAS) is now offered as the standard for various surgical procedures across multiple specialities.

Methods

A systematic search of MEDLINE, PubMed and EMBASE databases was performed to identify studies evaluating robot-assisted simple prostatectomy, salvage radical prostatectomy, surgery for urolithiasis, distal ureteric reconstruction, retroperitoneal lymph node dissection, augmentation ileocystoplasty, and artificial urinary sphincter insertion. Article titles, abstracts, and full text manuscripts were screened to identify relevant studies, which then underwent data extraction and analysis.

Results

In all, 72 studies evaluating the above techniques were identified. Almost all studies were retrospective single-arm case series. RAS appears to be associated with reduced morbidity, less blood loss, reduced length of stay, and comparable clinical outcomes in comparison to the corresponding open procedures, whilst having a shorter operative duration and learning curve compared to the equivalent laparoscopic techniques.

Conclusion

Emerging data demonstrate that the breadth and complexity of urological procedures performed using the da Vinci® platform (Intuitive Surgical Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA) is continually expanding. There is a gaining consensus that RAS is producing promising surgical results in a wide range of procedures. A major limitation of the current literature is the sparsity of comparative trials evaluating these procedures.

Comparison of Robot-Assisted Versus Open Simple Prostatectomy for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Recent advancements in minimally invasive approaches for prostate surgery have provided numerous options for surgical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). In the setting of a large prostate, an open simple prostatectomy was previously considered the gold standard surgical treatment. However, the recently updated American Urological Association (AUA) guidelines on surgical management of BPH now consider both open and minimally invasive approaches to simple prostatectomy viable alternatives for treating large glands, depending on expertise with the techniques. The purpose of our review is to discuss the minimally invasive robot-assisted approach and compare it to the classic open approach to simple prostatectomy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite longer operative times, the robotic approach is associated with shorter hospital stay and lower morbidity profile. The morbidity of an open approach remains significant. Blood transfusions are 3-4 times as likely compared to a robotic approach and major complications are twice as likely. Consistent with previous literature, our review shows functional outcome improvements like flow rate and symptom score to be comparable between the robotic and open approach. The amount of adenoma resected and PSA decline is also similar among robotic and open cases. Robot-assisted simple prostatectomy is a safe and effective procedure for BPH secondary to a large prostate gland. Appropriately, it is no longer deemed "investigational" by the latest AUA guidelines on BPH and recommended as an alternative to the open approach.

Robotic-assisted Urethra-sparing Simple Prostatectomy Via an Extraperitoneal Approach

OBJECTIVE

To present an original technique of robotic-assisted urethra-sparing simple prostatectomy (RAUSP) for treating patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From April 2015 to December 2016, 27 patients underwent RAUSP via an extraperitoneal approach. Baseline patient characteristics, perioperative outcomes, pathologic outcomes, postoperative Clavien complications, International Prostate Symptom Score, International Index of Erectile Function, and ejaculatory function were assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients (96.3%) successfully underwent RAUSP, one patient (3.7%) was converted to simple prostatectomy. Median operative time was 169 minutes (interquartile range: 150-185); median estimated blood loss was 235 mL (interquartile range: 180-300). Seven cases (26.9%) required urethral repair secondary to inadvertent urethrotomy. Mean catheterization time was 1.6 days (range 1-5). Clavien complications were reported, 6 being low grade (grade 1 or 2) with a single 3a complication (gross hematuria requiring bladder irrigation). Mean follow-up duration was 16.4 months (range 9-30). Postoperative questionnaire demonstrated that international prostate symptom score (P < .001) and quality of life score (P < .001) were significantly improved postoperatively. A total of 14 patients reported erectile function, 13 of which had normal ejaculation, only 1 complained retrograde ejaculation.

CONCLUSION

RAUSP is technically feasible for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Our data indicate that patients have short catheterization time, an acceptable risk profile, significant improvements of voiding function and maintaining antegrade ejaculation following this urethral-sparing technique.

Transvesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy with 360° circumferential reconstruction: step-by-step technique

OBJECTIVE

To present the step-by-step technique of a 360° mucosal reconstruction after transvesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP).

PATIENT AND METHODS

We analysed the first 23 consecutive patients who underwent RASP using our 360° reconstruction between December 2015 and October 2017. After transperitoneal intravesical adenoma enucleation, a circumferential 360° reconstruction is performed. The first suture is placed at the 9 o'clock position and the edge of the urethra and bladder mucosa is approximated using 2-0 barbed suture. The reconstruction is continued counter-clockwise and the bladder mucosa is approximated to the urethra circumferentially.

RESULTS

The mean (sd) operating time was 160.6 (28.1) min and the estimated blood loss was 98.6 (99.8) mL. No patients required conversion to open surgery. No intra-operative or postoperative transfusions were needed. No intra-operative complications occurred. The mean (sd) length of hospital stay was 2.1 (0.6) days. One postoperative complication was reported (respiratory distress in a patient with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, requiring intensive care unit admission).

CONCLUSION

Our 360° reconstruction during RASP is feasible and safe. The aim of the technique is to minimize use of electrocautery and decrease the raw surface area on the prostate capsule. This technical modification could potentially lessen postoperative bleeding after RASP and therefore the need for continuous bladder irrigation. In addition, it could potentially lead to mitigation of burning and irritative postoperative symptoms. Longer follow-up and comparative studies of different RASP techniques are still needed.

Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy by an Extraperitoneal Approach

The incidence of symptomatic benign prostate hyperplasia and bladder outlet obstruction has increased during the last two decades. Most of men are treated conservatively. When medical therapy is inadequate to relief symptoms, surgical treatment is necessary. Absolute indications for surgical treatment are gross hematuria, recurrent urinary infections and retentions as well as bladder stones. With advent of minimally invasive surgery, large prostates tend to be treated either endoscopically or laparoscopically (including robotic assistance). Herein, the robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy is described.

Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate versus Laparoscopic Transcapsular Prostatectomy: Perioperative Results and Three-Month Follow-Up

PURPOSE

Symptomatic benign prostatic hypertrophy greater than 70 cc used to be treated by invasive procedures. Holmium laser enucleation of prostate (HoLEP) and laparoscopic transcapsular prostatectomy (LTP) are two techniques whose efficacy has been demonstrated compared to standard onesmore invasive standard procedures. The objective was to evaluate and compare perioperative results from these two techniques for the treatment of benign prostatic hypertrophy greater than 70 cc.

METHODS

This was a non-randomized retrospective study comparing the HoLEP technique with LTP. From January 2012 to January 2015, 39 patients had HoLEP and 28 had LTP. Perioperative outcomes, complications, and functional results at 3 months were compared. A chi-2 squared test and Student's t test were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

In multivariate analysis, there was a statistically significant difference in favor of HoLEP for the duration of catheterization (1.9 vs. 3.7 days; p = 0.004) and the average length of stay (2.8 vs. 4.0 days, p = 0.010). There was a trend towards a greater decrease in postoperative hemoglobin levels in LTP (138 vs. 218 g/l; p = 0.082), which was statistically significant in univariate analysis (p = 0.033). Other endpoints were not significant, particularly the enucleated prostate volume compared to the total prostate volume (61.8 vs. 68.4%; p = 0.319) and postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

There was no increased morbidity for LTP compared to the HoLEP technique. However, the HoLEP technique appeared to be a less invasive technique, reducing the duration of catheterization, blood loss, and the average length of stay while maintaining good efficacy for the enucleated prostate volume.

[Long-term results after robot-assisted adenoma enucleation]

For selected patients with large-volume prostates, open simple prostatectomy is an effective and durable treatment option. Robot-assisted simple prostatectomy potentially reduces intraoperative blood loss, transfusion rates, length of hospital stay, and complications, but has longer operative times. In all, 16 series with level 3 evidence have been published and demonstrated its safety and efficacy. Long-term data are lacking and comparative outcome studies are needed to establish its benefits compared to open, simple prostatectomy and transurethral laser enucleation techniques.

Initial Canadian experience with robotic simple prostatectomy: Case series and literature review

INTRODUCTION

Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) has been touted as an alternative to open simple prostatectomy (OSP) to treat large gland benign prostatic hyperplasia. Our study assesses our institution's experience with RASP and reviews the literature.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review from January 2011 to November 2013 of all patients undergoing RASP and OSP. Operative and 90-day outcomes, including operation time, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay (LOS), transfusion requirements, and complication rates, were assessed.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients were identified: 4 undergoing RASP and 28 undergoing OSP. There was no difference in mean age at surgery (69.3 vs. 75.2 years; p = 0.17), mean Charlson Comorbidity Index (2.5 vs. 3.5; p = 0.19), and mean prostate volume on TRUS (239 vs. 180 mL; p = 0.09) in the robotic and open groups, respectively. There was a significant difference in the mean length of operation, with RASP exceeding OSP (161 vs. 79 min; p = 0.008). The mean intraoperative blood loss was significantly higher in the open group (835.7 vs. 218.8 mL; p = 0.0001). Mean LOS was shorter in the RASP group (2.3 vs. 5.5 days; p = 0.0001). No significant differences were noted in the 90-day transfusion rate (p = 0.13), or overall complication rate at 0% with RASP vs. 57.1% with OSP (p = 0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest RASP has a shorter LOS and lower intraoperative volume of blood loss, with the disadvantage of a longer operating time, compared to OSP. It is a feasible technique and deserves further investigation and consideration at Canadian centres performing robotic prostatectomies.