Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Prostate Surgeon’s Perspective

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Robotics in Genitourinary Surgery

  • 1154 Accesses

Abstract

The availability and promulgation of robotic technology has resulted in a paradigm shift for radical prostatectomy. Historically radical prostatectomy was performed using an open approach, usually the retropubic approach and rarely using a laparoscopic approach.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Castle EP, Lee D. Nomenclature of robotic procedures in urology. J Endourol. 2008;22: 1467.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J Clin. 2009;54(4):225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Fine J. 20-Year outcomes following conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 2005;293: 2095.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Wilt TJ, MacDonald R, Rutks I, et al. Systematic review: comparative effectiveness and harms of treatments for clinically localized prostate cancer. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148: 435.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Filen F, 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: 1144.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Steineck G, Helgesen F, Adolfsson J, et al. Quality of life after radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting. N Engl J Med. 2002;347: 790.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cookson MS, Aus G, Burnett AL, et al. Variation in the definition of biochemical recurrence in patients treated for localized prostate cancer: the American urological association prostate guidelines for localized prostate cancer update panel report and recommendations for a standard in the reporting of surgical outcomes. J Urol. 2007;177: 540.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Cooper MM, Birkmeyer JD, Bronner KK, et al. The Quality of Medical Care in the United States: A Report on the Medicare Program. Hanover, NH: The Center for the Evaluative Clinical Sciences, Dartmouth Medical School; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Shahinian VB, Kuo YF, Freeman JL, et al. Determinants of androgen deprivation therapy use for prostate cancer: role of the urologist. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98: 839.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cooperberg MR, Broering JM, Kantoff PW, et al. Contemporary trends in low risk prostate cancer: risk assessment and treatment. J Urol. 2007;178: S14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Cooperberg MR, Cowan J, Broering JM, et al. High-risk prostate cancer in the United States, 1990–2007. World J Urol. 2008;26: 211.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Dall’Era MA, Cooperberg MR, Chan JM, et al. Active surveillance for early-stage prostate cancer: review of the current literature. Cancer. 2008;112: 1650.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Yossepowitch O, Eastham JA. Radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer. World J Urol. 2008;26: 219.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ward JF, Slezak JM, Blute ML, et al. Radical prostatectomy for clinically advanced (cT3) prostate cancer since the advent of prostate-specific antigen testing: 15-year outcome. BJU Int. 2005;95: 751.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Berglund RK, Jones JS, Ulchaker JC, et al. Radical prostatectomy as primary treatment modality for locally advanced prostate cancer: a prospective analysis. Urology. 2006;67: 1253.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Thompson IM, Tangen CM, Paradelo J, et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy for pathological T3N0M0 prostate cancer significantly reduces risk of metastases and improves survival: long-term follow-up of a randomized clinical trial. J Urol. 2009;181: 956.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Messing EM, Manola J, Yao J, et al. Immediate versus deferred androgen deprivation treatment in patients with node-positive prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy. Lancet Oncol. 2006;7: 47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Walsh PC. Anatomic radical prostatectomy: evolution of the surgical technique. J Urol. 1998;160: 2418.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Nielsen ME, Schaeffer EM, Marschke P, Walsh PC. High anterior release of the levator fascia improves sexual function following open radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol. 2008;180(6):2557.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Schroeck FR, Krupski TL, Sun L, et al. Satisfaction and regret after open retropubic or robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2008;54: 785.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Berryhill R, Jhaveri J, Yadav R, et al. Robotic prostatectomy: a review of outcomes compared with laparoscopic and open approaches. Urology. 2008;72: 15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Catalona WS, Carvalhal GF, Mager DE, Smith DS. Potency, continence and complication rates in 1,870 consecutive strategies for radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 1999;162(2):433.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Ficarra V, Cavalleri S, Novara G, Aragona M, Artibani W. Evidence from robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a systematic review. Eur Urol. 2007;51: 45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Guillonneau B, Vallancien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris experience. J Urol. 2000;163(2):418.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Herrell SD, Smith JA Jr. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: what is the learning curve? Urology. 2005;66: 105.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Zorn KC, Orvieto MA, Gong EM, et al. Robotic radical prostatectomy learning curve of a fellowship-trained laparoscopic surgeon. J Endourol. 2007;21: 441.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ahlering TE, Woo D, Eichel L, Lee DI, Edwards R, Skarecky DW. Robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy: a comparison of one surgeon’s outcomes. Urology. 2004;63(5):819.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Grossfeld GD, Chang JJ, Broering JM, Miller DP, Yu J, Flanders SC, et al. Impact of positive surgical margins on prostate cancer recurrence and the use of secondary cancer treatment: data from the CaPSURE database. J Urol. 2000;163: 1171.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Karakiewicz PI, Eastham JA, Graefen M, et al. Prognostic impact of positive surgical margins in surgically treated prostate cancer: multi-institutional assessment of 5831 patients. Urology. 2005;66: 2292.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ghavamian R, Knoll A, Boczko J, Melman A. Comparison of operative and functional outcomes of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and radical retropubic prostatectomy: single surgeon experience. Urology. 2006;67(6):1241.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fromont G, Guillonneau B, Validire P, Vallancien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, preliminary pathologic evaluation. Urology. 2002;60(4):661.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Roumeguere T, Bollens R, Vanden Bossche M, Rochet D, Bialek D, Hoffman P, et al. Radical prostatectomy: a prospective comparison of oncological and functional results between open and laparoscopic approaches. World J Urol. 2003;20(6):360.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Menon M, Tewari A, Baize B, Guillonneau B, Vallancien G. Prospective comparison of radical retropubic prostatectomy and robot-assisted anatomic prostatectomy: the Vattikuti Urology Institute experience. Urology. 2002;60(5):864.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Tewari A, Srivasatava A, Menon M. Members of the VIP team. A prospective comparison of radical retropubic and robot-assisted prostatectomy: experience in one institution. BJU Int. 2003;92(3):205.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Smith JA Jr, Chan RC, Chang SS, et al. A comparison of the incidence and location of positive surgical margins in robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and open retropubic radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2007;178(6):2385.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Trabulsi EJ, Linden. RA, Bomella LG, McGinnis DE, Strup SE, Lallas CD. The addition of robotic surgery to an established laparoscopic radical prostatectomy program: effect on positive surgical margins. Can J Urol. 2008;15(2):3994.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Hu JC, Wang Q, Pashos CL, Lipsitz SR, Keating NL. Utilization and outcomes of minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(14):2278.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Nelson B, Kaufman M, Broughton G, Cookson MS, Chang SS, Herrell SD, et al. Comparison of length of hospital stay between radical retropubic prostatectomy and robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. J Urol. 2007;177(3):929.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Lotan Y. Economics of robotics in urology. Cur Opin Urol. 2010;20: 92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Lotan Y, Cadeddu JA, Gettman MT. The new economics of radical prostatectomy: cost comparison of open, laparoscopic, and robot assisted techniques. J Urol. 2004;172(4pt1):1431.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Bolenz C, Gupta A, Hotze T, et al. Cost comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2009; doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2009.11.008.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, UCSF-Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Cole Davis, Matthew R. Cooperberg & Peter R. Carroll

Authors
  1. Cole Davis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matthew R. Cooperberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peter R. Carroll
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter R. Carroll .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Medical Sciences, Dept. Urology, All India Institute of, Ansari Nagar, New Dehli, 110029, India

    Ashok Kumar Hemal

  2. Henry Ford Health System, W. Grand Blvd. 2799, Detroit, 48202, Michigan, USA

    Mani Menon

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Davis, C., Cooperberg, M.R., Carroll, P.R. (2011). Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Prostate Surgeon’s Perspective. In: Hemal, A., Menon, M. (eds) Robotics in Genitourinary Surgery. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-114-9_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-114-9_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-84882-113-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84882-114-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation