BACKGROUND Despite multiple studies evaluating the effectiveness of Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP), there is no definitive conclusion about the added value of RARP. A retrospective cluster study was conducted to evaluate long-term sexual and urinary functioning after RARP and Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy (LRP) based on real-world data from 12 Dutch hospitals. METHODS Data was collected from patients who underwent surgery between 2010 and 2012. A mixed effect model was used to evaluate differences between groups on urinary and sexual functioning (EPIC-26). Additionally, a regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the relationship between these functional outcomes and, among others, hospital volume. RESULTS 1370 (65.1%) patients participated, 907 underwent RARP and 463 LRP, with a median follow-up time of 7.08 years (SD = 0.98). The RARP group showed a statistically and clinically significant better urinary functioning compared to the LRP group (p = 0.002). RARP showed also a shorter procedure time (p=<0.001), reduced blood loss (p=<0.001), and a higher chance of neurovascular bundle preservation (39.8% vs 29.1%; p=<0.01). CONCLUSION RARP resulted in better long-term urinary function compared to LRP. Based on the results from this study, guidelines concerning the preferred surgery type and the position on reimbursement may change, especially when RARP proves to be cost-effective.
Long-term functional outcomes after robot-assisted prostatectomy compared to laparoscopic prostatectomy: Results from a national retrospective cluster study.