Advertisement

Laparoscopy or Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: Pros and Cons

  • Claude AbbouEmail author
  • Leticia Ruiz
Chapter

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.

Keywords

Laparoscopy Robotic Radical prostatectomy 

References

  1. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Guillonneau B, Vallancien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris experience. J Urol. 2000;163:418–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schuessler WW, Schulam PG, Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short-term experience. Urology. 1997;50(6):854–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Abbou CC, Salomon L, Hoznek A, et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: preliminary results. Urology. 2000;55:630–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fabrizio MD, Tüerk I, Shellhammer PF. Decreasing the learning curve using mentor initiated approach. J Urol. 2003;169:2063–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Herrell SD, Kwartowitz DM, Milhoua PM, Galloway RL. Toward image guided robotic surgery: system validation. J Urol. 2008;181:783–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Abbou CC, Hoznek A, Salomon L, et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with a remote controlled robot. J Urol. 2001;165:1964–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Palmer KJ, Lowe GJ, Coughlin GD, Patil N, Patel VR. Launching a successful robotic surgery program. J Endourol. 2008;22(4):819–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: conventional and robotic. Urology. 2005;66(suppl 5A):101–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Menon M, Tewari A, Peabody J, et al. Vattikuti institute prostatectomy: technique. J Urol. 2003;169:2289–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Guillonneau B, Vallencien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris technique. J Urol. 2000;163:1643–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bollens R, Vanden Bossche M, Roumeguere T, et al. Extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: results after 50 cases. Eur Urol. 2001;40:65–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 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. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of UrologyHenri Mondor HospitalCreteilFrance
  2. 2.Department of UrologyIcahn School of Medicine at Mount SinaiNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations