Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 1, 2025
Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
Published on: May 19, 2022
Comparison between laparoscopic and open prostatectomy: Oncological progression analysis
E Martínez-Holguín1, F Herranz-Amo1, J Mayor de Castro1
1Servicio de Urología, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, España.
Introduction:
There are very few Spanish studies that compare oncological outcomes following radical prostatectomy (RP) based on surgical approach, and their methodology is not appropriate.
Objective:
To compare oncological outcomes in terms of surgical margins (SM) and biochemical recurrence (BR) between open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP).
Material And Methods:
Comparison of two cohorts (307 with ORP and 194 with LRP) between 2007-2015. Surgical margin status was defined as positive or negative, and BR as a PSA rise of >0.4 ng/ml after surgery. To compare the qualitative variables, we employed the Chi-squared test, and ANOVA was used for quantitative variables. We performed a multivariate analysis using logistic regression to evaluate the predictive factors of SM, and a multivariate analysis using Cox regression to evaluate the predictive factors of BR.
Results:
Gleason 7 (3+4) was determined in the surgical specimens of 43.5% of patients, and 31.7% had positive SM. The most frequent pathological stage was pT2c, on the 61.9% of the cases. No significant differences were found between both groups, except for extracapsular extension (p=0.001), more frequent in LRP. The median follow-up was 49 months. BR was seen in the 23% of patients, without significant differences between groups. In the multivariable analysis, only the D'Amico risk group behaved as an independent predictive factor of positive SM, and Gleason score and positive SM acted as independent predictive factors of BR.
Conclusion:
The surgical approach did not influence SM status or BR.
