Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Laparoscopy or Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: Pros and Cons

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Robotics in Genitourinary Surgery

  • 1021 Accesses

Abstract

Radical prostatectomy is currently performed commonly by robotic assistance (RRP) in western world surpassing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy(LRP).Robotic assistance has distinct advantages over traditional laparoscopic surgery, as it improves precision because endowrist technology providing freedom of movements to its instruments in 3-D vision with better ergonomics for the surgeon. The biggest challenge is the cost of the robot, so as the price of its maintenance and instruments. The cost of LRP is much lower than that of the RRP. Of course, the learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is steep. Development of newer instrumentation with 4 degree of movements and 3-D vision during laparoscopy may resurrect role of LRP. This chapter focusses on pros and cons of LRP and RRP.

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 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Bolenz C, Gupta A, Hotze T, et al. Cost comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2010 Mar;57(3):453–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Guillonneau B, Vallancien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris experience. J Urol. 2000;163:418–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Schuessler WW, Schulam PG, Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short-term experience. Urology. 1997;50(6):854–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Abbou CC, Salomon L, Hoznek A, et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: preliminary results. Urology. 2000;55:630–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Stolzenburg JU, Do M, Pfeiffer H, Konig F, Aedtner B, Dorschner W. The endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE): technique and initial experience. World J Urol. 2002;20:48–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rassweiler J, Sentker L, Seeman O, Hatzinger M, Rumpelt HJ. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with the Heilbronn technique: an analysis of the first 180 cases. J Urol. 2001;166:2101–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Eden CG, Neill MG, Louie-Johnsun MW. The first 1000 cases of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in the UK: evidence of multiple ‘learning curves’. BJU Int. 2009;103(9):1224–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Fabrizio MD, Tüerk I, Shellhammer PF. Decreasing the learning curve using mentor initiated approach. J Urol. 2003;169:2063–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sterbis JR, Hanly EJ, Barry C, Herman BC, et al. Transcontinental telesurgical nephrectomy using the da Vinci robot in a porcine model. Urology. 2008;71(5):971–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ahlering TE, Skarecky D, Lee D, Clayman R. Successful transfer of open surgical skills to a laparoscopic environment using a robotic interface: initial experience with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2003;170:1738–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Patel VR, Tully AS, Holmes R, Lindsay J. Robotic radical prostatectomy in the community setting-the learning curve and beyond: initial 200 cases. J Urol. 2005;174:269–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A, et al. Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes. J Urol. 2002;168:945–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gamboa AJ, Santos RT, Sargent ER, et al. Long-term impact of a robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy mini fellowship training program on postgraduate urological practice patterns. J Urol. 2009;181:778–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Herrell SD, Kwartowitz DM, Milhoua PM, Galloway RL. Toward image guided robotic surgery: system validation. J Urol. 2008;181:783–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Abbou CC, Hoznek A, Salomon L, et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with a remote controlled robot. J Urol. 2001;165:1964–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Palmer KJ, Lowe GJ, Coughlin GD, Patil N, Patel VR. Launching a successful robotic surgery program. J Endourol. 2008;22(4):819–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lotan Y, Cadeddu JA, Gettman MT. The new economics of radical prostatectomy: cost comparison of open, laparoscopic and robot assisted techniques. J Urol. 2004;172:1431–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Scales CD, Jones PJ, Eisenstein EL, Preminger GM, Albala D. Local cost structures and the economics of robot assisted radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2005;174:2323–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Close A, Robertson C, Rushton S, et al. Comparative cost-effectiveness of robot-assisted and standard laparoscopic prostatectomy as alternatives to open radical prostatectomy for treatment of men with localised prostate cancer: a health technology assessment from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. Eur Urol. 2013;64:361–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Schroeck FR, Krupski TL, Sun L, et al. Satisfaction and regret after open retropubic or robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2008;54:785–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ficarra V, Novara G, Artibani W, et al. Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol. 2009;55:1037–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: conventional and robotic. Urology. 2005;66(suppl 5A):101–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hu JC, Nelson RA, Wilson TG, et al. Perioperative complications of laparoscopic and robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2006;175:541–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rozet F, Jaffe J, Braud G, et al. A direct comparison of robotic assisted versus pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a single institution experience. J Urol. 2007;178:478–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Menon M, Tewari A, Peabody J, et al. Vattikuti institute prostatectomy: technique. J Urol. 2003;169:2289–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Joseph JV, Vicente I, Madeb R, Erturk E, Patel HRH. Robot-assisted versus pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: are there any differences? BJU Int. 2005;96(1):39–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Guillonneau B, Vallencien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris technique. J Urol. 2000;163:1643–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Bollens R, Vanden Bossche M, Roumeguere T, et al. Extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: results after 50 cases. Eur Urol. 2001;40:65–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Gettman MT, Hoznek A, Salomon L, et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of the extraperitoneal approach using the da Vinci robotic system. J Urol. 2003;170:416–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Sooriakumaran P, Srivastava A, Shariat SF, et al. A multinational, multi-institutional study comparing positive surgical margin rates among 22 393 open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy patients. Eur Urol. 2014;66:450–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Hu JC, Wang Q, Pashos CL, Lipsitz SR, Keating NL. Utilization and outcomes of minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(14):2278–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ploussard G, Xylinas E, Salomon L, et al. Robot-assisted extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: experience in a high-volume laparoscopy reference centre. BJU Int. 2009;105(8):1155–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Atug F, Castle EP, Srivastav S, Burgess SV, Thomas R, Davis R. Positive surgical margins in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: impact of learning curve on oncologic outcomes. Eur Urol. 2006;49:866–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Berryhill R, Jhaveri J, Yadav R, et al. Robotic prostatectomy: a review of outcomes compared with laparoscopic and open approaches. Urology. 2008;72:15–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Murphy D, Kerger M, Crowe H, Peters JS, Costello AJ. 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. 2009;55:1358–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Paul A, Ploussard G, Nicolaiew N, et al. Oncologic outcome after extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: midterm follow-up of 1,115 procedures. Eur Urol. 2010 Feb;57(2):267–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Guillonneau B, El-Fettouh H, Baumert H, et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncological evaluation after 1,000 cases at Montsouris institute. J Urol. 2003;169:1261–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Mottrie A, Van Migen P, De Naeyer G, Schatteman P, Carpentier PF. Robot-Assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncologic and functional results of 184 cases. Eur Urol. 2007;52:746–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Ku JY, Lee CH, Lee JZ, Ha HK. Comparison of functional outcomes between laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a propensity score-matched comparison study. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajco.12595.

  41. Menon M, Shrivastava A, Bhandari M, Satyanarayana R, Siva S, Agarwal PK. Vattikuti institute prostatectomy: technical modifications in 2009. Eur Urol. 2009;56:89–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Henri Mondor Hospital, Creteil, France

    Claude Abbou

  2. Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA

    Leticia Ruiz

Authors
  1. Claude Abbou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Leticia Ruiz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Claude Abbou .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA

    Ashok K. Hemal

  2. Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, MI, USA

    Mani Menon

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Abbou, C., Ruiz, L. (2018). Laparoscopy or Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: Pros and Cons. In: Hemal, A., Menon, M. (eds) Robotics in Genitourinary Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20645-5_35

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20645-5_35

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-20644-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-20645-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation