Comparison of Retzius-sparing and conventional robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy regarding continence...

BACKGROUND: Studies comparing C-RARP and RS-RARP have reported different results and the choice between the two operation methods remains controversia.

We present the meta-analysis on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. The meta-analysis was carried out using Review Manager 5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, United Kingdom) and Stata SE 14.0. The mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to describe the results of continuous data; odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI were used to describe dichotomous data. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.

The meta-analysis revealed that RS-RARP had a statistically significant advantage in terms of continence recovery immediately after operation (OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.20-0.77; P = 0.007) (Fig. 2a), after 1 month (OR: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.10-0.29; P < 0.00001) (Fig. 2b), after 3 months (OR: 0.18, 95% CI: 0.09-0.36; P < 0.00001) (Fig. 2c), after 6 months (OR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.15-0.46; P < 0.00001) (Fig. 2d) and after 12 months (OR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.28-0.89; P = 0.02) (Fig. 2e).

This meta-analysis found that RS-RARP had better postoperative continence recovery than C-RARP, while sexual function recovery rates were not significantly different. There were also no significant differences in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, length of stay, positive margin rate and complications.