ROBOTIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY VS. OPEN RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY – A LITERATURE REVIEW

• DOI: https://doi.org/10.22533/at.ed.515712602015

• Palavras-chave: “prostate cancer,” “radical prostatectomy,” “robotics,” “open surgery,” “results”

• Keywords: “prostate cancer,” “radical prostatectomy,” “robotics,” “open surgery,” “results”

• Abstract:

  ABSTRACT: The second most common type of cancer in men worldwide is prostate cancer, and radical prostatectomy (RP) is the first-line treatment. Open RP (ORP) is considered the gold standard surgical treatment in terms of oncological outcomes but is generally associated with a lower quality of life, as reflected in rates of urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction. Robot-assisted RP (RARP) differs favorably from OPR, among other factors, due to the optical magnification of the surgical field provided by the robotic system, enabling high precision in tissue manipulation, which would lead to better functional and oncological outcomes. This literature review aims to analyze the functional, oncological, perioperative, and postoperative outcomes of RP, as well as quality of life, comparing the two approaches in 58 articles published from 2014 to 2024. The following types of studies were included: observational, non-randomized controlled clinical, and randomized controlled clinical. The results for functional outcomes accumulated in greater numbers for the indifference between both surgical approaches, PRA and PRAR. For oncological results, the same pattern occurred, with the exception of the lower positive surgical margin (PSM) rate, where there was a significant accumulation of results both in favor of PRAR and for the absence of significance between the techniques. The only outcome whose results accumulated in greater numbers in favor of PRA was operating time. For the improvement in quality of life after PR, there was no preference for one or the other surgical technique at 12 months postoperatively.