Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 3, 2026
Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
Published on: May 19, 2022
Comparison of radical prostatectomy techniques: open, laparoscopic and robotic assisted
Rodrigo Frota1, Burak Turna, Rodrigo Barros
1Section of Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery, Glickman Urological Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio 44195, USA. rodrigofrotaf@gmail.com
Introduction:
To review the current status of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (RALP) in relation to radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) in the management of localized prostate cancer.
Materials And Methods:
Between 1982 and 2007 published literature was reviewed using the National Library of Medicine database and the following key words: retropubic, laparoscopic, robotic, robot-assisted, and radical prostatectomy. Special emphasis was given to the technical and cost considerations as well as operative, functional and oncologic outcomes. In particular, reports with pioneering work that have contributed to the evolution of the technique, presenting comparative outcomes and with large series encompassing intermediate/long term follow-up, were taken into account.
Results:
After intermediate term follow-up, LRP and RALP achieved similar oncologic and functional results compared to RRP. However, LRP and RALP were associated with decreased blood loss, faster convalescence and better cosmetics when compared to RRP. The RALP technique is undoubtedly more expensive.
Conclusions:
The oncologic and functional outcomes for LRP and RALP are similar to RRP after intermediate term follow-up. Long term follow-up and adequately designed studies will determine the inherent advantages and disadvantages of the individual techniques in the management of localized prostate cancer.