Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 24, 2025

Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
Published on: May 19, 2022
Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Using Single-port Perineal Approach: Technique and Single-surgeon Matched-paired
Louis Lenfant1, Juan Garisto2, Guilherme Sawczyn2
1Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA; Urology Department, GRC n°5, Predictive Onco-urology, AP-HP, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Background:
Radical perineal prostatectomy (RPP) has been revived with the advent of single-port (SP) robotic surgery. However, its interest and precise role need to be evaluated and better defined.
Objective:
To describe in detail the technique of SP-RPP and compare initial perioperative outcomes with those of multiport robot-assisted transperitoneal radical prostatectomy (MP-RARP).
Design, Setting, And Participants:
From October 2018 to June 2020, perioperative data of 26 consecutive patients who underwent SP-RPP for localized prostate cancer (PCa) in a single institution were prospectively entered into an institutional review board-approved database. Data of 86 consecutive patients treated from September 2017 to September 2018 with MP-RARP by the same surgeon, before the beginning of the SP experience, were used as comparators.
Surgical Procedure:
SP-RPP was performed using the SP robotic platform (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) according to the technique described in the supplementary video.
Measurements:
Demographics, and intra- and postoperative data were analyzed in a matched-paired design with a 1:1 ratio on the following factors: age at surgery, prostate-specific antigen level, preoperative Gleason score, and history of abdominal surgery.
Results And Limitations:
After matching, baseline characteristics were comparable except for the rate of prior laparotomy, which was higher in the SP-RPP group (52% vs 8%, p < 0.001). In the SP-RPP group, 84% of the patients had a high risk and an unfavorable intermediate risk of positive surgical margins (PSMs) versus 57% in the MP-RARP group (p = 0.03). While the rate of nonlimited PSMs (ie, >3 mm) was higher in the SP-RPP group (38.5% vs 7.7%, p < 0.01), the number of patients with biochemical recurrence at 1 yr was comparable between SP-RPP and MP-RARP (1 vs 3, p = 0.3).
Conclusions:
SP-RPP is a complex procedure for patients with a complex surgical history and high-risk localized PCa with limited alternative therapeutic options.
Patient Summary:
Our study suggests that patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer and limited treatment options due to a complex abdominal surgical history (ie, frozen pelvis) may be suitable candidates for single-port radical perineal prostatectomy.
More Related Videos
07:22Surgical Robot-Assisted Transanal Specimen Extraction Radical Sigmoidectomy Without an Auxiliary Abdominal Incision
Published on: June 13, 2025
12:34Robot-Assisted Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy Including Resection and Reconstruction of the Spleno-Mesenteric Junction
Published on: January 3, 2020