Stolzenburg Jens-Uwe, Holze Sigrun, Arthanareeswaran Vinodh-Kumar-Adithyaa, Neuhaus Petra, Do Hoang Minh, Haney Caelán Max, Dietel Anja, Truss Michael C, Stützel Karin Daniela, Teber Dogu, Hohenfellner Markus, Rabenalt Robert, Albers Peter, Mende Meinhard
Department of Urology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Department of Urology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Eur Urol Focus. 2022 Nov;8(6):1583-1590. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2022.02.002. Epub 2022 Feb 23.
Recently, our LAP-01 trial demonstrated superiority of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP) over conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) with respect to continence at 3 mo.
To compare the continence, potency, and oncological outcomes between RARP and LRP in the 12-mo follow-up.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this multicentre, randomised, patient-blinded controlled trial, patients referred for radical prostatectomy to four hospitals in Germany were randomly assigned (3:1) to undergo either RARP or LRP.
Continence was assessed as a patient-reported outcome through validated questionnaires. Secondary endpoints included potency and oncological outcomes. Data were statistically analysed by bivariate tests and multivariable models.
At 12 mo, follow-up data were available for 701 of 782 patients. Continence at 6 and 12 mo after surgery was better in RARP patients, however no longer statistically significant (p = 0.068 and 0.38, respectively). Patients who were potent at baseline and underwent nerve-sparing surgery reported significantly higher potency after RARP, as defined by the capability to maintain an erection sufficient for intercourse at 3 (p = 0.005), 6 (p = 0.018), and 12 mo (p = 0.013). There were no statistically significant differences in oncological outcomes at 12 mo. It is a limitation that the influence of different anastomotic techniques was not investigated in this study.
Both LRP and RARP offer a high standard of therapy for prostate cancer patients. However, robotic assistance offers better functional outcomes in specific areas such as potency and early continence in patients who are eligible for nerve-sparing RP.
We compared outcomes 12 mo after radical prostatectomy between robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopy. Both methods were equivalent with respect to oncological outcomes. Better recovery of continence in patients with robotic-assisted surgery, which was observed at 3 mo, blurred up to 12 mo. A benefit of robotic-assisted surgery was also observed in potency.
最近,我们的LAP - 01试验表明,在术后3个月的控尿方面,机器人辅助腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术(RARP)优于传统腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术(LRP)。
比较RARP和LRP在12个月随访期内的控尿、性功能及肿瘤学结局。
设计、地点和参与者:在这项多中心、随机、患者盲法对照试验中,被转诊至德国四家医院接受根治性前列腺切除术的患者被随机分配(3:1)接受RARP或LRP。
通过经过验证的问卷将控尿作为患者报告的结局进行评估。次要终点包括性功能和肿瘤学结局。数据通过双变量检验和多变量模型进行统计分析。
在12个月时,782例患者中有701例有随访数据。RARP组患者术后6个月和12个月的控尿情况较好,但不再具有统计学意义(分别为p = 0.068和0.38)。基线时有性功能且接受保留神经手术的患者在RARP术后报告的性功能显著更高,以在3个月(p = 0.005)、6个月(p = 0.018)和12个月(p = 0.013)时维持足以进行性交的勃起能力来定义。12个月时肿瘤学结局无统计学显著差异。本研究未调查不同吻合技术的影响是一个局限性。
LRP和RARP都为前列腺癌患者提供了高标准的治疗。然而,对于适合保留神经的根治性前列腺切除术的患者,机器人辅助在性功能和早期控尿等特定方面能提供更好的功能结局。
我们比较了机器人辅助和传统腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术后12个月的结局。两种方法在肿瘤学结局方面相当。机器人辅助手术患者在3个月时观察到的更好的控尿恢复情况在12个月时变得不明显。在性功能方面也观察到了机器人辅助手术的益处。