Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy in Patients with Clinically High-Risk Prostate Cancer

  • Malte W. VetterleinEmail author
  • Mani Menon
  • Firas Abdollah


Patients with high-risk prostate cancer have a greater risk of biochemical recurrence, metastasis, the need for additional therapies, and prostate cancer-specific mortality. Although robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy has largely supplanted open surgical approaches in localized low-risk disease, its role in the high-risk setting is still controversial, as evidence from the literature is limited. The aim of the following chapter is to summarize contemporary evidence from currently available data.


Robotic surgical procedures Prostatectomy Prostatic neoplasms Surgery Treatment outcome 


  1. 1.
    Cooperberg MR, Lubeck DP, Mehta SS, Carroll PR, CaPsure. Time trends in clinical risk stratification for prostate cancer: implications for outcomes (data from CaPSURE). J Urol. 2003;170(6 Pt 2):S21–5. discussion S6-7CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Schultz D, Blank K, Broderick GA, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 1998;280(11):969–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rider JR, Sandin F, Andren O, Wiklund P, Hugosson J, Stattin P. Long-term outcomes among noncuratively treated men according to prostate cancer risk category in a nationwide, population-based study. Eur Urol. 2013;63(1):88–96.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yossepowitch O, Eggener SE, Serio AM, Carver BS, Bianco FJ Jr, Scardino PT, et al. Secondary therapy, metastatic progression, and cancer-specific mortality in men with clinically high-risk prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2008;53(5):950–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tsui C, Klein R, Garabrant M. Minimally invasive surgery: national trends in adoption and future directions for hospital strategy. Surg Endosc. 2013;27(7):2253–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Trinh QD, Sammon J, Sun M, Ravi P, Ghani KR, Bianchi M, et al. Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open radical prostatectomy: results from the nationwide inpatient sample. Eur Urol. 2012;61(4):679–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Briganti A, Bianchi M, Sun M, Suardi N, Gallina A, Abdollah F, et al. Impact of the introduction of a robotic training programme on prostate cancer stage migration at a single tertiary referral centre. BJU Int. 2013;111(8):1222–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lee EK, Baack J, Duchene DA. Survey of practicing urologists: robotic versus open radical prostatectomy. Can J Urol. 2010;17(2):5094–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Abdollah F, Sood A, Sammon JD, Hsu L, Beyer B, Moschini M, et al. Long-term cancer control outcomes in patients with clinically high-risk prostate cancer treated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: results from a multi-institutional study of 1100 patients. Eur Urol. 2015;68(3):497–505.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sood A, Jeong W, Dalela D, Klett DE, Abdollah F, Sammon JD, et al. Role of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in the management of high-risk prostate cancer. Indian J Urol. 2014;30(4):410–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yuh B, Artibani W, Heidenreich A, Kimm S, Menon M, Novara G, et al. The role of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection in the management of high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol. 2014;65(5):918–27.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sagalovich D, Calaway A, Srivastava A, Sooriakumaran P, Tewari AK. Assessment of required nodal yield in a high risk cohort undergoing extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy and its impact on functional outcomes. BJU Int. 2013;111(1):85–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ham WS, Park SY, Rha KH, Kim WT, Choi YD. Robotic radical prostatectomy for patients with locally advanced prostate cancer is feasible: results of a single-institution study. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2009;19(3):329–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lavery HJ, Nabizada-Pace F, Carlucci JR, Brajtbord JS, Samadi DB. Nerve-sparing robotic prostatectomy in preoperatively high-risk patients is safe and efficacious. Urol Oncol. 2012;30(1):26–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Casey JT, Meeks JJ, Greco KA, Wu SD, Nadler RB. Outcomes of locally advanced (T3 or greater) prostate cancer in men undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2009;23(9):1519–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tewari AK, Srivastava A, Huang MW, Robinson BD, Shevchuk MM, Durand M, et al. Anatomical grades of nerve sparing: a risk-stratified approach to neural-hammock sparing during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). BJU Int. 2011;108(6 Pt 2):984–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Abdollah F, Gandaglia G, Suardi N, Capitanio U, Salonia A, Nini A, et al. More extensive pelvic lymph node dissection improves survival in patients with node-positive prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2015;67(2):212–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rogers CG, Sammon JD, Sukumar S, Diaz M, Peabody J, Menon M. Robot assisted radical prostatectomy for elderly patients with high risk prostate cancer. Urol Oncol. 2013;31(2):193–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ou YC, Yang CK, Wang J, Hung SW, Cheng CL, Tewari AK, et al. The trifecta outcome in 300 consecutive cases of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy according to D'Amico risk criteria. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013;39(1):107–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zugor V, Witt JH, Heidenreich A, Porres D, Labanaris AP. Surgical and oncological outcomes in patients with preoperative PSA >20 ng/ml undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Anticancer Res. 2012;32(5):2091–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yee DS, Narula N, Amin MB, Skarecky DW, Ahlering TE. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: current evaluation of surgical margins in clinically low-, intermediate-, and high-risk prostate cancer. J Endourol. 2009;23(9):1461–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shikanov SA, Thong A, Gofrit ON, Zagaja GP, Steinberg GD, Shalhav AL, et al. Robotic laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for biopsy Gleason 8 to 10: prediction of favorable pathologic outcome with preoperative parameters. J Endourol. 2008;22(7):1477–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Connolly SS, Cathcart PJ, Gilmore P, Kerger M, Crowe H, Peters JS, et al. Robotic radical prostatectomy as the initial step in multimodal therapy for men with high-risk localised prostate cancer: initial experience of 160 men. BJU Int. 2012;109(5):752–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gandaglia G, Trinh QD, Hu JC, Schiffmann J, Becker A, Roghmann F, et al. The impact of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy on the use and extent of pelvic lymph node dissection in the "post-dissemination" period. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2014;40(9):1080–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    McGinley KF, Sun X, Howard LE, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, Kane CJ, et al. Utilization and impact of surgical technique on the performance of pelvic lymph node dissection at radical prostatectomy: results from the shared equal access regional cancer hospital database. Int J Urol. 2016;23(3):241–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jeong W, Sood A, Ghani KR, Pucheril D, Sammon JD, Gupta NS, et al. Bimanual examination of the retrieved specimen and regional hypothermia during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a novel technique for reducing positive surgical margin and achieving pelvic cooling. BJU Int. 2014;114(6):955–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gandaglia G, Abdollah F, Hu J, Kim S, Briganti A, Sammon JD, et al. Is robot-assisted radical prostatectomy safe in men with high-risk prostate cancer? Assessment of perioperative outcomes, positive surgical margins, and use of additional cancer treatments. J Endourol. 2014;28(7):784–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Punnen S, Meng MV, Cooperberg MR, Greene KL, Cowan JE, Carroll PR. How does robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) compare with open surgery in men with high-risk prostate cancer? BJU Int. 2013;112(4):E314–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Martin RC 2nd, Brennan MF, Jaques DP. Quality of complication reporting in the surgical literature. Ann Surg. 2002;235(6):803–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Jung JH, Seo JW, Lim MS, Lee JW, Chung BH, Hong SJ, et al. Extended pelvic lymph node dissection including internal iliac packet should be performed during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2012;22(8):785–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yuh BE, Ruel NH, Mejia R, Wilson CM, Wilson TG. Robotic extended pelvic lymphadenectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2012;61(5):1004–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Diaz M, Peabody JO, Kapoor V, Sammon J, Rogers CG, Stricker H, et al. Oncologic outcomes at 10 years following robotic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2015;67(6):1168–76.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sukumar S, Rogers CG, Trinh QD, Sammon J, Sood A, Stricker H, et al. Oncological outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: long-term follow-up in 4803 patients. BJU Int. 2014;114(6):824–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Abdollah F, Klett DE, Sood A, Sammon JD, Pucheril D, Dalela D, et al. Predicting pathological outcomes in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: a preoperative nomogram. BJU Int. 2015;116(5):703–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Uberoi J, Brison D, Patel N, Sawczuk IS, Munver R. Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer with high-risk features: predictors of favorable pathologic outcome. J Endourol. 2010;24(3):403–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Briganti A, Joniau S, Gontero P, Abdollah F, Passoni NM, Tombal B, et al. Identifying the best candidate for radical prostatectomy among patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2012;61(3):584–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Harty NJ, Kozinn SI, Canes D, Sorcini A, Moinzadeh A. Comparison of positive surgical margin rates in high risk prostate cancer: open versus minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. Int Braz J Urol. 2013;39(5):639–46. discussion 47-8CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pierorazio PM, Mullins JK, Eifler JB, Voth K, Hyams ES, Han M, et al. Contemporaneous comparison of open vs minimally-invasive radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2013;112(6):751–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sridhar AN, Cathcart PJ, Yap T, Hines J, Nathan S, Briggs TP, et al. Recovery of baseline erectile function in men following radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: a prospective analysis using validated measures. J Sex Med. 2016;13(3):435–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ostby-Deglum M, Brennhovd B, Axcrona K, Fossa SD, Dahl AA. A comparative study of erectile function and use of erectile aids in high-risk prostate cancer patients after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Scand J Urol. 2015;49(6):1–7.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Koo KC, Jung DC, Lee SH, Choi YD, Chung BH, Hong SJ, et al. Feasibility of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for very-high risk prostate cancer: surgical and oncological outcomes in men aged >/=70 years. Prostate Int. 2014;2(3):127–32.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Jayram G, Decastro GJ, Large MC, Razmaria A, Zagaja GP, Shalhav AL, et al. Robotic radical prostatectomy in patients with high-risk disease: a review of short-term outcomes from a high-volume center. J Endourol. 2011;25(3):455–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Abdollah F, Dalela D, Sood A, Sammon J, Cho R, Nocera L, et al. Functional outcomes of clinically high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a multi-institutional analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2017;20(4):395–400.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Nguyen CT, Reuther AM, Stephenson AJ, Klein EA, Jones JS. The specific definition of high risk prostate cancer has minimal impact on biochemical relapse-free survival. J Urol. 2009;181(1):75–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Tewari A, Divine G, Chang P, Shemtov MM, Milowsky M, Nanus D, et al. Long-term survival in men with high grade prostate cancer: a comparison between conservative treatment, radiation therapy and radical prostatectomy–a propensity scoring approach. J Urol. 2007;177(3):911–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Zelefsky MJ, Eastham JA, Cronin AM, Fuks Z, Zhang Z, Yamada Y, et al. Metastasis after radical prostatectomy or external beam radiotherapy for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer: a comparison of clinical cohorts adjusted for case mix. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(9):1508–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Cooperberg MR, Vickers AJ, Broering JM, Carroll PR. Comparative risk-adjusted mortality outcomes after primary surgery, radiotherapy, or androgen-deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer. Cancer. 2010;116(22):5226–34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Boorjian SA, Karnes RJ, Viterbo R, Rangel LJ, Bergstralh EJ, Horwitz EM, et al. Long-term survival after radical prostatectomy versus external-beam radiotherapy for patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Cancer. 2011;117(13):2883–91.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Abdollah F, Sun M, Thuret R, Jeldres C, Tian Z, Briganti A, et al. A competing-risks analysis of survival after alternative treatment modalities for prostate cancer patients: 1988–2006. Eur Urol. 2011;59(1):88–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM, Barry MJ, Aronson WJ, Fox S, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(3):203–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Filen F, Ruutu M, Garmo H, Busch C, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in localized prostate cancer: the Scandinavian prostate cancer group-4 randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100(16):1144–54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Reese AC, Sadetsky N, Carroll PR, Cooperberg MR. Inaccuracies in assignment of clinical stage for localized prostate cancer. Cancer. 2011;117(2):283–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Ploussard G, Masson-Lecomte A, Beauval JB, Ouzzane A, Bonniol R, Buge F, et al. Radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer defined by preoperative criteria: oncologic follow-up in national multicenter study in 813 patients and assessment of easy-to-use prognostic substratification. Urology. 2011;78(3):607–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Kaplan RN, Rafii S, Lyden D. Preparing the "soil": the premetastatic niche. Cancer Res. 2006;66(23):11089–93.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Loppenberg B, Dalela D, Karabon P, Sood A, Sammon JD, Meyer CP, et al. The impact of local treatment on overall survival in patients with metastatic prostate cancer on diagnosis: a national cancer data base analysis. Eur Urol. 2016;72(1):14–9.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Fossati N, Trinh QD, Sammon J, Sood A, Larcher A, Sun M, et al. Identifying optimal candidates for local treatment of the primary tumor among patients diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer: a SEER-based study. Eur Urol. 2015;67(1):3–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Malte W. Vetterlein
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Mani Menon
    • 3
  • Firas Abdollah
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of UrologyUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfHamburgGermany
  2. 2.Center for Outcomes Research, Analytics and Evaluation, Vattikuti Urology InstituteHenry Ford HospitalDetroitUSA
  3. 3.Vattikuti Urology InstituteHenry Ford Health SystemDetroitUSA
  4. 4.Center for Outcomes Research, Analytics and Evaluation, Henry Ford HospitalVattikuti Institute of UrologyDetroitUSA

Personalised recommendations