Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial experience with first 112 cases

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Robotic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study we report our initial robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) experience for organ-confined prostate cancer with the first 112 cases between August 2009 and January 2011. The mean age was 61 (46–76) years. Gleason scores ranged between 4 and 9, and the mean prostate volume was 38.7 (15–115) ml. The mean follow-up time was 8.1 (1–18) months. The mean operative time was 174.7 (75–360) min, and the mean estimated blood loss was 141 (60–800) ml. A nerve-sparing procedure was performed bilaterally in 79 cases and unilaterally in 15 cases. All the complications seen (8 out of 112 patients, 7.1%) were grade 1 and 2 according to the Clavien classsification system. Postoperatively, five (4.4%) patients needed transfusion. Mean drain extraction time was 3.2 (2–15) days and mean hospital stay was 4 (2–18) days. The catheter was removed on postoperative day 8.5 (6–20). Surgical margin was positive in 13 (11.6%) patients. Forty-nine patients have 6 months and 30 patients have 12 months follow-up. The continence rate were 29.4, 64.2, 84.2, 91.1 and 96.6% immediately after catheter removal and at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months, respectively. No anastomotic stricture or urinary retention was seen in the follow-up period. RALRP is a safe and feasible technique in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Our initial experience with this procedure shows promising short-term outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bivalacqua TJ, Pierrorazio PM, Su LM (2009) Open, laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy: optimizing the surgical approach. Surg Oncol 18:223–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ahlering TE, Woo D, Eichel L, Lee DI, Edwards R, Skarecky DW (2004) Robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectony: a comparison of one surgeon’s outcomes. Urology 63:819–822

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Tewari A, Srivasatava A, Menon M (2003) A prospective comparison of radical retropubic and robot-assisted prostatectomy: experience in one institution. BJU Int 92:205–210

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Rassweiler J, Seemann O, Schulze M, Teber D, Hatzinger M, Frede T (2003) Laparoscopic versus open radical prostatectomy: a comparative study at a single institution. J Urol 169:1689–1693

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lepor H (2005) Open versus laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Rev Urol 7:115–127

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Boccon-Gibod L (2006) Radical prostatectomy: open? Laparoscopic? Robotic? Eur Urol 49:598–599

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Rozet F, Harmon J, Cathelineau X, Barret E, Vallancien G (2006) Robot-assisted versus pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. World J Urol 24:171–179

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gettman MT, Hoznek A, Salomon L, Katz R, Borkowski T, Antiphon P et al (2003) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of the extraperitoneal aproach using the da Vinci robotic system. J Urol 170:416–419

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fischer B, Engel N, Fehr JL, John H (2008) Complications of robotic assisted radical prostatectomy. World J Urol 26(6):595–602

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Binder J, Kramer W (2001) Robotically-assisted radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 87:408–410

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Palmer KJ, Rocco B, Patel MB, Patel VR (2009) Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a review of current outcomes. J Urol 104(10):1428–1435

    Google Scholar 

  12. Patel VR, Palmer KJ, Coughlin G, Samavedi S (2008) Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: perioperative outcomes of 1,500 cases. J Endourol 22(10):2299–2305

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Badani KK, Kaul S, Menon M (2007) Evolution of robotic radical prostatectomy: assessment after 2,766 procedures. Cancer 110(9):1951–1958

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ficarra V, Novara G, Artibani W, Cestari A, Galfano A, Graefen M, Guazzoni G, Guillonneau B, Menon M, Montorsi F, Patel V, Rassweiler J, Van Poppel H (2009) Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol 55(5):1037–1063

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Krambeck AE, DiMarco DS, Rangel LJ, Bergstralh EJ, Myers RP, Blute ML, Gettman MT (2009) Radical prostatectomy for prostatic adenocarcinoma: a matched comparison of open retropubic and robot-assisted techniques. BJU Int 103(4):448–453

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Patel VR, Chammas MF Jr, Shah S (2007) Robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a review of the current state of affairs. Int J Clin Pract 61:309–314

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Ahlering TE, Skarecky D, Lee D et al (2003) Successful transfer of open surgical skills to a laparoscopic environment using a robotic interface: initial experience with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 170:1738–1741

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Rocco B, Matei DV, Melegari S, Ospina JC, Mazzoleni F, Errico G, Mastropasqua M, Santoro L, Detti S, de Cobelli O (2009) Robotic vs open prostatectomy in a laparoscopically naive centre: a matched-pair analysis. BJU Int 104(7):991–995

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Parsons JK, Bennett JL (2008) Outcomes of retropubic, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted prostatectomy. Urology 72(2):412–416

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Murphy DG, Kerger M, Crowe H, Peters JS, Costello AJ (2009) Operative details and oncological and functional outcome of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: 400 cases with a minimum of 12 months follow-up. Eur Urol 55(6):1358–1366

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kim KH, Lorenzo EIS, Jeong W, Oh CK, Yu HS, Rha KH (2010) Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy after previous cancer surgery. J Robotic Surg 3:223–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Nelson B, Kaufman M, Broughton G, Cookson MS, Chang SS, Herrell SD, Baumgartner RG, Smith JA Jr (2007) Comparison of length of hospital stay between radical retropubic prostatectomy and robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. J Urol 177(3):929–931

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hu JC, Nelson RA, Wilson TG, Kawachi MH, Ramin SA, Lau C, Crocitto LE (2006) Perioperative complications of laparoscopic and robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 175(2):541–546

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6,336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Menon M, Tewari A, Peabody JO, Shrivastava A, Kaul S, Bhandari A, Hemal AK (2004) Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy, a technique of robotic radical prostatectomy for management of localized carcinoma of the prostate: experience of over 1,100 cases. Urol Clin North Am 31:701–717

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Smith AD, Badlani G, Clayman RV et al (2007) Smith’s textbook of endourology, 2nd edn. Quality Medical Publishing, Inc., St. Louis

    Google Scholar 

  27. Rozet F, Jaffe J, Braud G et al (2007) A direct comparison of robotic assisted versus pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a single institution experience. J Urol 178:478–482

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Coelho RF, Palmer KJ, Rocco B, Moniz RR, Chauhan S, Orvieto MA, Coughlin G, Patel VR (2010) Early complication rates in a single-surgeon series of 2,500 robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies: report applying a standardized grading system. Eur Urol 57(6):945–952

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Patel VR, Thaly R, Shah K (2007) Robotic radical prostatectomy: outcomes of 500 cases. BJU Int 99:1109–1112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. El-Hakim A, Tewari A (2004) Robotic prostatectomy: a review. Med Gen Med 6:20 (online)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Wieder JA, Soloway MS (1998) Incidence, etiology, location, prevention, and treatment of positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Urol 160:299–315

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Ficarra V, Cavalleri S, Novara G, Aragona M, Artibani W (2007) Evidence from robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review. Eur Urol 51(1):45–56

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Smith JA Jr, Chan RC, Chang SS, Herrell SD, Clark PE, Baumgartner R et al (2007) A comparison of the incidence and location of positive surgical margins in robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and open retropubic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 178:2385–2389

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Atug F, Castle EP, Srivastav SK, Burgess SV, Thomas R, Davis R (2006) Positive surgical margins in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: impact of learning curve on oncologic outcomes. Eur Urol 49:866–871

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Rocco F, Carmignani L, Acquati P et al (2006) Restoration of posterior aspect of rhabdosphincter shortens continence time after radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 175:2201–2206

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Rocco B, Gregori A, Stener S et al (2007) Posterior reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter allows a rapid recovery of continence after transperitoneal videolaparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 51:996–1003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bakirkoy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, Tevfik Saglam Cad. No:11 Zuhuratbaba, 34147, Istanbul, Turkey

    Ali Ihsan Tasci, Alper Bitkin, Yusuf Ozlem Ilbey, Volkan Tugcu & Erkan Sonmezay

Authors
  1. Ali Ihsan Tasci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alper Bitkin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yusuf Ozlem Ilbey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Volkan Tugcu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Erkan Sonmezay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ali Ihsan Tasci.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tasci, A.I., Bitkin, A., Ilbey, Y.O. et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial experience with first 112 cases. J Robotic Surg 6, 283–288 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-011-0307-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-011-0307-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation