Recovery of urinary function after robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus radical perineal prostatectomy for early-stage prostate cancer
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
INTRODUCTION: Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) has largely replaced open radical prostatectomy in many centers. Radical perineal prostatectomy (RPP) is another less invasive approach that has not been widely adopted. RPP offers excellent exposure of the urinary sphincter and bladder neck that may provide good urinary function outcomes. We evaluate urinary function after RALP and RPP. METHODS: Retrospective review of a prospective radical prostatectomy database was performed. Urinary modules from the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-Urinary Function (EPIC-UF) questionnaire were used to determine urinary symptoms at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after surgery. RESULTS: 753 men underwent RALP (n = 623) or RPP (n = 130). Of these, 558 had complete data and were included in our study (RALP: n = 458, RPP: n = 100). A higher number of patients undergoing RALP than RPP had pelvic lymph node dissection (20.2% vs. 0%, p < 0.0001) and cavernosal neurovascular bundle sparing (79.2% vs. 68.4%, p < 0.0001). 558 patients had complete EPIC-UF data. Overall urinary recovery was greater for RALP than RPP at 6 months (p = 0.028). Urinary incontinence and function were also more improved after RALP compared to RPP at 6 months (p = 0.021, p = 0.006). However, no differences in overall, urinary incontinence, or urinary function scores were seen at 12, 18, or 24 months. There was no difference between groups in urinary bother or irritative/obstructive symptoms at any time point. CONCLUSIONS: RALP had more rapid recovery of urinary function at 6 months vs. RPP; at 12-24 months, however, RALP and RPP had similar urinary function recovery in all urinary subdomains.
