MP80-15 3D LAPAROSCOPIC VERSUS ROBOT ASSISTED LAPAROSCOPIC PROSTATECTOMY: 1-YEAR FUNCTIONAL RESULTS OF a RANDOMIZED PROSPECTIVE STUDY

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023MP80-15 3D LAPAROSCOPIC VERSUS ROBOT ASSISTED LAPAROSCOPIC PROSTATECTOMY: 1-YEAR FUNCTIONAL RESULTS OF a RANDOMIZED PROSPECTIVE STUDY Henry Haapiainen, Teemu Murtola, Juha Koskimäki, Jarno Riikonen, Tomi Pakarainen, Mika Raitanen, and Antti Kaipia Henry HaapiainenHenry Haapiainen More articles by this author , Teemu MurtolaTeemu Murtola More articles by this author , Juha KoskimäkiJuha Koskimäki More articles by this author , Jarno RiikonenJarno Riikonen More articles by this author , Tomi PakarainenTomi Pakarainen More articles by this author , Mika RaitanenMika Raitanen More articles by this author , and Antti KaipiaAntti Kaipia More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003357.15AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Recent evidence suggests that robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) results in faster recovery of continence compared to conventional laparoscopic prostatectomy (LRP). One main difference of robot assisted surgery is 3D vision which gives an advantage over conventional 2D laparoscopic surgery. Modern laparoscopic equipment with high quality 3D vision may narrow the reported differences of outcomes between robot assisted and 2D laparoscopic surgery. Therefore, we undertook a randomized prospective study to compare the 1-year functional results of RALP and 3D LRP. METHODS: 145 patients were recruited between June 2018- July 2021 and randomized 1:1 between RALP (n:75) and 3D LRP (n:70) arm. 3D LRP procedures were performed by one and RALP procedures by 3 surgeons. The 1-year functional results were evaluated with the EPIC-26 questionnaire and by usage of safety pads. The data was analyzed with IBM SPSS statistic version 27. RESULTS: Preoperative parameters (Age, BMI, Prostate size, PSA) and oncological results (ISUP, pT) are shown in Table 1. A boxplot of 1-year functional results is shown in Figure 1. In statistical analysis, no significant differences between surgical modalities were seen in any of the 5 domains of EPIC-26. At 1 year post operatively 56.7% / 58.3% of the patients that had undergone RALP / 3D LRP did not wear any safety pad. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that 3D LRP and RALP result in similar functional outcomes at 1 year post-operatively. Source of Funding: None © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e1158 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Henry Haapiainen More articles by this author Teemu Murtola More articles by this author Juha Koskimäki More articles by this author Jarno Riikonen More articles by this author Tomi Pakarainen More articles by this author Mika Raitanen More articles by this author Antti Kaipia More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...