Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Metachronous contralateral recurrence in upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a multi-institutional competing-risks analysis from the ROBUUST 3.0 registry.

Urology practice·2026
Same author

Insulin Pathway Changes in Localized Prostate Cancer: A Multi-Institutional Analysis.

Cancers·2026
Same author

Time toxicity of intravesical BCG versus sequential intravesical gemcitabine and docetaxel for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

BJUI compass·2026
Same author

Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Imaging and Initial Treatment for Prostate Cancer.

JAMA oncology·2026
Same author

Tumor-informed ctDNA surveillance after radical nephrectomy and level IV IVC thrombectomy for clear cell renal cell carcinoma: Early detection of molecular residual disease.

Urology case reports·2026
Same author

Associations Between Medicaid Insurance, Facility Medicaid Share, and Guideline-Concordant Prostate Cancer Care.

Urology·2026
Same journal

Is Nonpapillary Puncture a Feasible Alternative to Papillary Access in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Journal of endourology·2026
Same journal

Procedure, Safety, and Outcomes of Patient-Controlled Sedation in Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy: A 7-Year Cohort Study.

Journal of endourology·2026
Same journal

Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Patients Undergoing Holmium Laser Enucleation of Prostate for Benign Hyperplasia: A Preoperative Nomogram and a Postoperative Surveillance Protocol.

Journal of endourology·2026
Same journal

Bubble Trouble: The Thermal Risk of Ureteral Laser Lithotripsy in an Air Bubble.

Journal of endourology·2026
Same journal

Development of an Interpretable Machine Learning Model for Predicting Clavien-Dindo Grade ≥2 Complications after Unilateral Minimally Invasive Pyeloplasty in UPJO: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Journal of endourology·2026
Same journal

Comparison of Appendiceal Onlay Ureteroplasty and Appendiceal Interposition Ureteroplasty for Complex Proximal Ureteral Strictures in Children: Insights Gained from Long-Term Follow-Up.

Journal of endourology·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jan 10, 2026

Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
12:10

Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

Published on: May 19, 2022

8.9K

Comprehensive Outcome Analysis of Single-Port Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy.

Dong-Hoon Lim1,2, Jaime A Cavallo1, Michael S Leapman1

  • 1Department of Urology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.

Journal of Endourology
|November 28, 2025
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP) shows similar blood loss and margin rates to multiport (MP-RARP). However, SP-RARP has longer operative times and lower early continence rates, suggesting a learning curve effect.

Keywords:
continencefunctional outcomespotencyprostatectomyrobotsingle port

More Related Videos

Single-Port Robotic-assisted Transaxillary Breast-conserving Surgery: A Prospective, Single-arm, Non-randomized Phase IIa Clinical Trial
03:07

Single-Port Robotic-assisted Transaxillary Breast-conserving Surgery: A Prospective, Single-arm, Non-randomized Phase IIa Clinical Trial

Published on: August 19, 2025

772
Robot-Assisted Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy Including Resection and Reconstruction of the Spleno-Mesenteric Junction
12:34

Robot-Assisted Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy Including Resection and Reconstruction of the Spleno-Mesenteric Junction

Published on: January 3, 2020

17.2K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jan 10, 2026

Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
12:10

Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

Published on: May 19, 2022

8.9K
Single-Port Robotic-assisted Transaxillary Breast-conserving Surgery: A Prospective, Single-arm, Non-randomized Phase IIa Clinical Trial
03:07

Single-Port Robotic-assisted Transaxillary Breast-conserving Surgery: A Prospective, Single-arm, Non-randomized Phase IIa Clinical Trial

Published on: August 19, 2025

772
Robot-Assisted Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy Including Resection and Reconstruction of the Spleno-Mesenteric Junction
12:34

Robot-Assisted Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy Including Resection and Reconstruction of the Spleno-Mesenteric Junction

Published on: January 3, 2020

17.2K

Area of Science:

  • Urology
  • Surgical Oncology
  • Robotic Surgery

Background:

  • Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is a primary treatment for localized prostate cancer.
  • Single-port (SP) RARP is emerging as a potentially less invasive alternative to conventional multiport (MP) RARP.
  • Evaluating SP-RARP's efficacy requires comparing its outcomes against established MP-RARP procedures.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare perioperative and functional outcomes between SP-RARP and MP-RARP.
  • To assess the efficacy of SP-RARP in an academic surgical setting.
  • To evaluate the learning curve impact on SP-RARP outcomes.

Main Methods:

  • Retrospective analysis of 145 consecutive SP-RARP cases performed by a high-volume surgeon.
  • Propensity score matching (PSM) to compare SP-RARP with a historical MP-RARP cohort.
  • Postoperative continence and potency assessed at 3 and 6 months.

Main Results:

  • No significant differences in estimated blood loss (EBL) or positive surgical margin rates between SP-RARP and MP-RARP.
  • SP-RARP demonstrated significantly longer operative times (OT) compared to MP-RARP.
  • SP-RARP exhibited lower early continence rates at 3 and 6 months post-surgery compared to MP-RARP.

Conclusions:

  • SP-RARP achieves comparable oncological safety (margin rates) and perioperative safety (EBL) to MP-RARP.
  • Longer operative times and reduced early functional recovery (continence) are observed with SP-RARP.
  • These findings suggest that SP-RARP may have suboptimal functional outcomes during the initial learning curve phase.