A comprehensive examination and meta-analysis evaluating perioperative, oncological, and functional results of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in comparison to three-dimensional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (3D LRP).

Assessing the perioperative, oncological, and functional results of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) versus three-dimensional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (3D LRP), a comprehensive exploration of the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases was carried out until July 2024. The combined results were evaluated by utilizing the weighted mean differences (WMDs) and odds ratios (ORs) through the application of Stata version 18, where data were gathered and scrutinized. In addition, sensitivity analyses were performed to ensure the robustness of our findings. In the meta-analysis we conducted, four studies were incorporated in total, which comprised two randomized controlled trials, one study that was retrospective and another that was prospective. The findings revealed that RARP was associated with a significantly reduced estimated blood loss (EBL) (WMD - 31.04, 95%CI - 54.57, - 7.51; p = 0.01) compared to 3D LRP. Nonetheless, there were no notable statistical variances seen between the two groups regarding operative time (OT), nerve-sparing rates, positive surgical margin (PSM) rates, biochemical recurrence (BCR) rates, or the restoration of urinary continence and potency 3 or 6 months after the surgery. In conclusion, our comprehensive meta-analysis has offered a detailed contrast between the results of RARP and 3D LRP in the treatment of prostate cancer. The findings highlight a considerable decrease in projected blood loss linked with RARP, yet no notable variances were detected between the two methods regarding other perioperative, oncological, and functional results.