Clinical outcomes and costs of robotic surgery in prostate cancer: a multiinstitutional study in Korea

摘要

BackgroundThis study compared the surgical, functional, and oncologic outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP), laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP), and retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) in Korean men.MethodsThe study population included 864 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer in the departments of urology of five tertiary hospitals between 2010 and 2011. RALP, LRP, and RRP perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes as well as complications were assessed. Medical cost data were analyzed for 682 of 864 patients.ResultsNo significant differences were found among the three groups regarding the length of stay, biochemical recurrence, complications, and metastasis. The RALP group had a significantly higher rate of pelvic lymph node dissection (64.6% vs. 35.3% or 53.3%,P value<0.0001) and bilateral nerve-sparing procedures (15.7% vs. 10.0% or 8.9%,P value<0.0001) and less blood loss (median 250?mL vs. 300?mL or 700?mL,P value<0.0001) than the LRP and RRP groups. The 12-month continence recovery rate was higher in the RALP group (92.1%) than in the LRP (86.5%) and RRP (84.4%) groups (P value<0.0001). Medical costs for RALP were approximately twofold to threefold higher than those for LRP or RRP.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that surgical and functional outcomes are better with robot-assisted surgery than with laparoscopic or open surgery in terms of estimated blood loss and urinary continence; however, no differences were found among groups in terms of biochemical recurrence and the rate of complications.