Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Open radical retropubic prostatectomy.

Stacy Loeb1, William J Catalona

  • 1Department of Urology, Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, D.C. 20037, USA.

Urologic Oncology
|December 1, 2007
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Diagnosis and Staging of Patients with Prostate Cancer: Report from the 2025 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) Diagnostics.

European urology·2026
Same author

Availability, quality, and understandability of English and Spanish-language YouTube content on PSMA PET imaging for prostate cancer.

Clinical imaging·2026
Same author

Balancing Cure and Quality of Life: Navigating Functional Outcomes in Localized Prostate Cancer.

American Society of Clinical Oncology educational book. American Society of Clinical Oncology. Annual Meeting·2026
Same author

The burden of Peyronie's disease on the female partner: a qualitative study.

The journal of sexual medicine·2026
Same author

Intimacy After Diagnosis: Navigating Sexual Health Conversations and Disparities Among Cancer Survivors.

The American journal of hospice & palliative care·2026
Same author

Evolving strategies in prostate cancer: Emerging approaches and unmet needs from the Bridging the Gaps in Prostate Cancer expert panel.

Cancer·2026
Same journal

Does size matter? A national analysis of patterns of adjuvant immunotherapy receipt and tumor size-dependent survival in pT3N0M0 clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

Urologic oncology·2026
Same journal

Ipsilateral sampling maintains clinically significant cancer detection and reduces overdiagnosis in PI-RADS 4-5 lesions.

Urologic oncology·2026
Same journal

Testis-sparing surgery for small testicular masses: Functional and oncological outcomes.

Urologic oncology·2026
Same journal

Subcapsular versus total orchiectomy in advanced prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and patient-reported outcomes.

Urologic oncology·2026
Same journal

Featured SUO Fellow: Soum Lokeshwar, MD MBA.

Urologic oncology·2026
Same journal

Automating standardization of prostate cancer biopsy and histopathology reports with privacy-preserving local large language models.

Urologic oncology·2026
See all related articles

Robotic prostatectomy offers a minimally invasive option for prostate cancer surgery, but its long-term benefits and oncologic outcomes compared to open surgery require further investigation. More data is needed to confirm if it matches the established standards.

Area of Science:

  • Urology
  • Surgical Oncology

Background:

  • Open radical prostatectomy has been the standard for prostate cancer surgery for over 20 years.
  • Laparoscopic and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy are emerging as popular alternatives.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the short-term convalescence and oncologic outcomes of robotic prostatectomy compared to open radical prostatectomy.
  • To address concerns regarding positive surgical margin rates in robotic prostatectomy, especially during the learning curve.

Main Methods:

  • Comparative analysis of surgical techniques for radical prostatectomy (open, laparoscopic, robotic).
  • Assessment of short-term recovery and complication rates.
  • Evaluation of positive surgical margin rates and cancer control outcomes.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • The advantages of newer laparoscopic and robotic techniques regarding short-term recovery are not yet clearly established.
  • High positive surgical margin rates have been reported with robotic prostatectomy, particularly in early stages of adoption.

Conclusions:

  • Further research and long-term follow-up are essential to determine if robotic prostatectomy offers comparable cancer control and functional outcomes to open radical prostatectomy.
  • The learning curve for robotic prostatectomy may influence its effectiveness and safety, necessitating continued data collection.