Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 11, 2026

Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
Published on: May 19, 2022
Assessment of Surgical Quality in Radical Prostatectomy: Review of Objective Intraoperative and Functional Evaluation
Jakub Kempisty1,2, Krzysztof Balawender3, Oskar Dąbrowski1
1Klinika Urologii i Urologii Onkologicznej, Uniwersytecki Szpital Kliniczny im. Fryderyka Szopena w Rzeszowie, ul. Szopena 2, 35-055 Rzeszow, Poland.
Abstract:
Radical prostatectomy remains a cornerstone treatment for localized prostate cancer. While oncological control is essential, functional outcomes such as urinary continence and erectile function play a critical role in patient satisfaction and quality of life. Despite the growing emphasis on surgical quality, no standardized intraoperative scoring system has been universally adopted. This narrative review summarizes current approaches to evaluating the technical quality of radical prostatectomy and associated functional outcomes. It focuses on objective intraoperative assessment tools and functional evaluation scales used in clinical research and surgical education. A non-systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed and Scopus databases to identify relevant intraoperative assessment tools (e.g., GEARS, PACE, and OSATS), functional scales (e.g., IIEF, EPIC, and pad test), and outcome reporting systems. Articles were reviewed for scale structure, clinical applicability, validation status, and limitations. Several tools have been developed to evaluate surgical skills in minimally invasive surgery, yet few are specific to radical prostatectomy. Most rely on subjective surgeon assessment or delayed functional outcomes, limiting their utility for intraoperative feedback. Video-based assessment is promising but underutilized. A gap remains for a prostatectomy-specific, reproducible, and real-time assessment scale. There is a pressing need for validated tools that bridge the gap between surgical technique and functional outcomes. Current methods lack specificity and reproducibility. Development of an objective, intraoperative scoring system may support surgeon feedback, quality improvement, and improved patient counseling.

