Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 2, 2026
Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
Published on: May 19, 2022
A Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial Examining the Impact of the Retzius-sparing Approach on Early Urinary
Deepansh Dalela1, Wooju Jeong1, Madhu-Ashni Prasad1
1VUI Center for Outcomes Research, Analytics and Evaluation, Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, MI, USA.
Background:
Retzius-sparing (posterior) robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) may expedite postoperative urinary continence recovery.
Objective:
To compare the short-term (≤3 mo) urinary continence (UC), urinary function (UF), and UF-related bother outcomes of posterior RARP compared with standard anterior approach RARP.
Design, Setting, And Participants:
A total of 120 patients aged 40-75 yr with low-intermediate-risk prostate cancer (per the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines) underwent primary RARP at a tertiary care institution.
Intervention:
Eligible men were randomized to receive either posterior (n=60) or anterior (n=60) RARP.
Outcome Measurements And Statistical Analyses:
Primary outcome was UC (defined as 0 pads/one security liner per day) 1 week after catheter removal. Secondary outcomes were short-term (≤3 mo) UC recovery, and UF and UF-related bother scores (measured by the International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS] and IPSS quality-of-life scores, respectively) assessed at 1 and 2 wk, and 1 and 3 mo following catheter removal. Continence outcomes were objectively verified using 24-hr pad weights. UC recovery was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression; UF and UF-related bother outcomes were compared using linear generalized estimating equations (GEEs). Perioperative complications, positive surgical margin, and biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS) represent secondary outcomes reported in the study.
Results And Limitations:
Compared with 48% in the anterior arm, 71% men undergoing posterior RARP were continent 1 wk after catheter removal (p=0.01); corresponding median 24-h pad weights were 25 and 5g (p=0.001). Median time to continence in posterior versus anterior RARP was 2 and 8 d postcatheter removal, respectively (log-rank p=0.02); results were confirmed on multivariable regression analyses. GEE analyses showed that UF-related bother (but not UF) scores were significantly lower in the posterior versus anterior RARP group at 1 wk, 2 wk, and 1 mo on GEE analyses. Incidence of postoperative complications (12% anterior vs 18% posterior) and probability of BCRFS (0.91 vs 0.91) were comparable in the two arms.
Conclusions:
In this single-center randomized study, the Retzius-sparing approach of RARP resulted in earlier recovery of UC and lower UF-related bother compared with standard RARP. These results require long-term validation and reproduction by other centers, as well as studies on men with high-risk localized disease.
Patient Summary:
In our hands, men with low-intermediate-risk prostate cancer undergoing Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) had earlier recovery of urinary continence and lower urinary function-related bother than those undergoing standard RARP.
