• Michael Froehner, Vladimir Novotny, Rainer Koch, Steffen Leike, Lars Twelker, and Manfred P Wirth.
• Department of Urology, University Hospital 'Carl Gustav Carus', Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany. Michael.Froehner@uniklinikum-dresden.de
• Urol. Int. 2013 Jan 1; 90 (3): 312-5.

BackgroundThe best technique of radical prostatectomy - open versus robot-assisted approach - is controversially discussed. In this study, we compared the complication rates of open and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy during the introduction and subsequent routine use of a da Vinci® robotic device while open surgery remained the standard approach.Patients And MethodsBetween January 1st, 2006, and June 4th, 2012, 2,754 men underwent radical prostatectomy at our department. Among them, 317 received robot-assisted and 2,438 open surgery. According to the requirements for prostate cancer centers certified by the Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft (German Cancer Society), a prospective database recording perioperative complications was built up. The complication rates of open and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy were compared with the χ(2) or Fisher exact test. The distributions of quantitative variables were compared with U tests.ResultsWhereas the demographic factors favored patients selected for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, there were no differences between open and robot-assisted surgery concerning length of stay, autologous blood transfusion rates and the incidence of perioperative complications.ConclusionsOpen and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy had comparable complication rates. With better patient- and tumor-related parameters as well as decreasing transfusion rates in the robot-assisted subgroup, this observation might reflect the learning curves of the involved robotic surgeons.Copyright © 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel.

38 keywords...

hide…