Extraperitoneal Laparoscopic Versus Transperitoneal Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Approaches for Extended Pelvic Lymph...

We aim to directly compare the feasibility and safety of extended pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) during transperitoneal robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (Tp-RARP) and extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (Ep-LRP). We retrospectively identified the prospectively maintained database records of 162 patients diagnosed with prostate cancer (PC) who underwent Ep-LRP or Tp-RARP with extended PLND. Patients with risk of nodal metastases over 5% according to Briganti nomogram received extended PLND. All data analyzed in this study were based on the documentation in our PC database including age, body mass index, Charlson comorbidity index score, preoperative prostate-specific antigen, history of abdominal surgery, biopsy Gleason score, total operation time, postoperative pelvic drainage time, pathological results, lymph node yield (LNY), percentage lymph node involvement (%LNI), and perioperative complications. Patients were followed up for biochemical recurrence in the postoperative period. Eighty-two of the 162 enrolled patients were in group 1 (Ep-LRP+PLND) and 80 were in group 2 (Tp-RARP+PLND). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups regarding preoperative demographics and clinical characteristics. The median LNY was 17 (range 8-27) and 17.5 (range 10-29) in groups 1 and 2, respectively, and no statistically significant difference was found. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of biochemical recurrence-free survival with mean follow-up of 44.8 months after radical surgery. Our results support the view that extended PLND through the Ep-LRP approach is a feasible and safe procedure without compromising oncological efficacy compared with a similar template attempted during Tp-RARP. Clinical Trial Registration number is 01/21-2.