BACKGROUND

The literature is lacking randomised controlled trials comparing robot-assisted (RARP) and laparoscopic (LRP) radical prostatectomy, especially for follow-up >1 yr.

OBJECTIVE

To report 5-yr outcomes for our previously published prospective randomised study comparing RARP and LRP.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: From January 2010 to January 2011, 120 patients with organ-confined prostate cancer were enrolled and randomly assigned to RARP or LRP.

INTERVENTION

A single surgeon performed all interventions using the same transperitoneal anterograde technique.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Continence, potency, and serum prostate-specific antigen were assessed postoperatively at 1, 3, 6, and 12 mo, and then every 6 mo until 60 mo. At the end of the follow-up period, patients were administered questions 1 and 46 of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite questionnaire to assess their satisfaction with the intervention and general health status. A generalised estimating equations model was used to compare time series data for functional results, and Kaplan-Meier and Cox models were used to analyse oncologic outcomes.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The probability of achieving continence (odds ratio [OR] 2.47, p<0.021) and potency (OR 2.35, p<0.028) over time was more than doubled for the RARP compared to the LRP group. There was no difference between the two approaches in terms of patient survival. Pathologic Gleason score, positive surgical margins, and pT stage were associated with significantly higher biochemical recurrence in Cox multivariate models. Patient satisfaction with the intervention and their general health status was significantly higher in the RARP group.

CONCLUSIONS

Throughout the 5-yr follow-up, RARP yielded better functional results compared to LRP, without compromising oncologic outcomes.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this report we looked at 5-yr outcomes for a study comparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and laparascopic radical prostatectomy for the treatment of prostate cancer. We found that continence and potency are better among patients treated with RARP, while oncologic results are comparable.