Robot-assisted Simple Prostatectomy Research Articles

Prostate Surgery for Benign Prostatic Syndrome >200 ml: Endoscopic, Robotic, or Open Approach

Surgical approaches for benign prostatic hyperplasia have evolved and diversified over the past decades. While numerous studies document the efficacy of surgical procedures for moderate prostate sizes, there remains insufficient data for large prostate volumes >200 ml, leaving important questions unanswered regarding their effectiveness and safety. Consequently, selecting and adapting suitable therapeutic options for this specific patient group often poses a significant challenge. In this context, this review comprehensively summarizes and discusses current insights into surgical treatment options for large prostate volumes (>200 ml) following an extensive literature review.In summary, the surgical treatment of prostate volumes >200 ml is a challenge regardless of the chosen surgical method. Minimally invasive approaches should be considered standard practice today. Anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate is a size-independent method and has the lowest morbidity. As it may be performed in spinal anaesthesia, endoscopic enucleation is feasible in patients with an increased anaesthetic risk. In extremely large prostate glands, the procedure poses challenges even for highly experienced surgeons. Especially in obese patients, the surgeon should be familiar with different exit strategies. Robot-assisted simple prostatectomy provides a minimally invasive alternative that may also treat pathologies such as diverticula or large bladder stones in the same surgical session. Due to its transabdominal approach, the morbidity and anaesthetic risk is comparatively higher. Each centre and surgeon should individually decide in which method they have the greatest expertise and which option is best suited for the specific case. In cases of limited expertise, it is advisable to refer patients to a centre with appropriate specialization.

Incidence and management of BPH surgery-related urethral stricture: results from a large U.S. database.

Urethral stricture (US) is a well-known complication after surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). This study aimed to evaluate the contemporary incidence of the US after different types of BPH surgery, to identify associated risk factors and to assess its management. A retrospective analysis was conducted using the PearlDiver™ Mariner database, containing de-identified patient records compiled between 2011 and 2022. Specific International Classification of Diseases (ICD) and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes were employed to identify population characteristics and outcomes. All the most employed surgical procedures for BPH treatment were considered. Multivariable logistic regression was employed to evaluate factors associated with diagnosis of post-operative US. Among 274,808 patients who underwent BPH surgery, 10,918 developed post-operative US (3.97%) within 12 months. Higher incidence of US was observed following TURP (4.48%), Transurethral Incision of the Prostate (TUIP) (3.67%), Photoselective Vaporization of the Prostate (PVP) (3.92%), HoLEP/ThuLEP (3.85%), and open Simple Prostatectomy (SP) (3.21%). Lower incidence rates were observed after laparoscopic\robot-assisted SP (1.76%), Aquablation (1.59%), Prostatic Urethral Lift (PUL) (1.07%), Rezum (1.05%), and Prostatic Artery Embolization (PAE) (0.65%). Multivariable analysis showed that patients undergoing PUL, Rezum, Aquablation, PAE, and PVP were associated with a reduced likelihood of developing US compared to TURP. US required surgical treatment in 18.95% of patients, with direct visual internal urethrotomy (DVIU) and urethroplasty performed in 14.55% and 4.50% of cases, respectively. Urethral dilatation (UD) in an outpatient setting was the primary management in most cases (76.7%). The present analysis from a contemporary large dataset suggests that the incidence of US after BPH surgery is relatively low (<5%) and varies among procedures. Around 94% of US cases following BPH surgery are managed using minimally invasive treatment approaches such as UD and DVIU.

MP20-16 Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Patient Outcomes in Robotic Assisted Simple Prostatectomy vs. Prostate Enucleation: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis

MP20-16 Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Patient Outcomes in Robotic Assisted Simple Prostatectomy vs. Prostate Enucleation: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis

MP20-20 Outcomes Following Robotic-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy in Patients on Active Surveillance/Watchful Waiting or with Incidental Prostate Cancer Diagnosis on Pathology

MP20-20 Outcomes Following Robotic-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy in Patients on Active Surveillance/Watchful Waiting or with Incidental Prostate Cancer Diagnosis on Pathology

Safety and complications of continuation of aspirin therapy in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic simple prostatectomy

To evaluate the safety and feasibility of continued perioperative aspirin at the time of robotic assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP). We performed a retrospective review of our IRB approved institutional database of patients who underwent RASP between 2013 and 2022. Comparative groups included patients taking aspirin in the perioperative period and those not taking aspirin pre-operatively. The primary outcome was any post-operative bleeding related complication using the modified Clavien–Dindo classification. Secondary outcomes included the identification of risk factors for increased blood loss in the entire study population, operative time, and blood transfusion requirement. 143 patients underwent RASP of which 55 (38.5%) patients continued perioperative aspirin therapy and 88 (61.5%) patients did not. Baseline demographics were similar between groups. Patients taking perioperative aspirin had a higher rate of hypertension (74.5% vs 58.0%, p = 0.04) and other cardiovascular disease (30.9% vs 11.4%, p = 0.007). Postoperative complications were similar between the groups (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3; p = 0.43). Median blood loss (150 cc vs 150 cc, p = 0.38), percentage drop in hemoglobin (13.4 vs 13.2, p = 0.94) and blood transfusion rate (3.6 vs 1.1, p = 0.56) were also similar between groups. The median blood loss was 150 ml for the whole study population. On regression analysis, neither aspirin nor any other variable was associated with increased blood loss (> 150 ml). Aspirin can be safely continued perioperatively in patients undergoing RASP without any risk of bleeding related complications, blood loss, or increased transfusion rate.

Single port robot-assisted radical and simple prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Aim of our study was to review the current evidence on single port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP) and SP robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (SP-RASP) procedures. A comprehensive bibliographic search on multiple databases was conducted in July 2023. Studies were included if they assessed patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer or candidate for benign prostatic hyperplasia surgery (P) who underwent SP-RARP or SP-RASP, respectively, (I), compared or not with other surgical techniques (C), evaluating perioperative, oncological, or functional outcomes (O). Prospective and retrospective original articles were included (S). A meta-analysis of comparative studies between SP-RARP and MP-RARP was performed. A total of 21 studies investigating 1400 patients were included in our systematic review, 18 were related to SP-RARP while 3 to SP-RASP. Only 8 comparative studies were eligible for meta-analysis. Mean follow-up was 8.1 (±5.8) months. Similar outcomes were observed for SP-RARP and MP-RARP in terms of operative time, catheterization time, pain score, complications rate, continence and potency rates, positive surgical margin, and biochemical recurrence. Length of hospital stay was shorter in the SP group after sensitivity analysis (WMD -0.58, 95% IC -1.17 to -0.9, p < 0.05). Subgroup analysis by extraperitoneal approach did not show any statistical difference, except for a lower positive margins rate in the SP extraperitoneal technique compared to MP-RARP. Overall, SP-RASP exhibited shorter hospital stay and lower rate of de novo urinary incontinence when compared to other techniques, while no differences were reported in terms of postoperative International Prostate Symptom Score, post void residual and maximum flow. Overall comparable oncological, functional, and perioperative outcomes can be achieved with SP platform. Subgroup analysis by different approaches did not reveal significant variations in outcomes. However, the retrospective nature of the studies, the limited follow-up, and the relatively small sample size of selected Centers may impact these results.

Single-port Transvesical Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy: Surgical Technique and Clinical Outcomes

BackgroundSurgical management of large prostatic adenomas can be performed via open, endoscopic, or robotic approaches. A low-profile single-port (SP) robot was built to work in confined areas (ie, the bladder) and regionalize surgery. ObjectiveTo describe the novel SP transvesical (TV) robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) and report clinical outcomes. Design, setting, and participantsSP TV RASP cases were performed in an academic hospital by two surgeons from 2019 to 2023. A total of 117 cases were performed, and data from patients with at least 12 mo of follow-up were analyzed. The inclusion criterion was severe obstructive urinary symptoms or catheter-dependent urinary retention due to large prostates with volume >80 ml. Surgical procedureThe procedure consisted of two main steps through a single 3-cm suprapubic incision: first, enucleation of the adenoma, and second, a 360° bladder mucosal flap reconstruction. No drains or continuous bladder irrigation was used routinely. MeasurementsIntraoperative parameters, pre- and postoperative uroflowmetry, and 1-yr clinical outcomes were assessed. We used descriptive statistics to analyze the data. Results and limitationsAll procedures were completed successfully without additional ports or conversions. The median console time and estimated blood loss were 107 min and 100 ml, respectively. Transfusion rate was 0%. Intraoperative complications included two suspected air emboli attributed to high insufflation pressures. There were no major postoperative complications. In total, 95.8% were discharged within the first 24 h, with a median length of stay and pain score of 5 h and 3/10, respectively. There was persistent improvement in the median International Prostate Symptom Score and flow rate after 1 yr. The median Sexual Score Inventory for Men score was 20 at 12 mo. Our study is limited by its retrospective nature and cohort size. ConclusionsSP TV RASP is a feasible alternative for the management of severe benign prostatic hyperplasia that promotes fast recovery and demonstrates 1-yr improvement in urinary function. Patient summarySingle-port transvesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy is a minimally invasive alternative for the treatment of large benign prostatic growth. A single robotic arm goes through a small incision in the skin and bladder to extract the obstructive prostatic tissue. Afterward, reconstruction of the area is done to decrease bleeding and improve postoperative symptoms. We found that patients recover quickly and have excellent clinical results with a low risk of complications.

Comparison of perioperative and short-terms outcomes of en-bloc Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and robot-assisted simple prostatectomy: a propensity-score matching analysis.

Surgical treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) has seen an evolution during the last decades. On one hand, en-bloc HoLEP emerged as a valid endoscopic treatment regardless prostate size. On the other hand, robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) has gained attention in larger prostates showing encouraging results. Herein, for the first time in the scientific scenario, we sought to compare the outcomes of RASP and en-bloc HoLEP cases after propensity-score matching (PSM) analysis. We retrospectively queried our prospectively database of patients treated with HoLEP or RASP between 2017 and 2022 among two high-volume centers. PSM was applied based on the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) questionnaire, prostate volume and max-flow rate. All procedures were performed by a single surgeon per center. Outcomes were assessed at 1, 3, and 6-month postoperatively and therefore annually. Trifecta definition was used to assess "success" in surgical procedures and was defined as the contemporary presence of: a) no postoperative complications within the first postoperative month; b) 1-month postoperative Qmax >15 ml/s and c) no urinary incontinence at 3-month evaluation. Overall, 48 HoLEP and 47 RASPs were matched. Operative time, hospitalization time (median 4 vs 5 days) and catheterization time (median 3 vs 2 day) were found to be shorter in the HoLEP group as compared to the counterpart (p < 0.05). Early postoperative complication rate was also lower in the HoLEP cohort (6.2% vs 12.6%; p = 0.03) as well as postoperative haemoglobine blood level drop (1.4 vs 2.4 g/dL; p = 0.03). On the other hand, postoperative antegrade ejaculation (55.3% vs 6.8%) 1-month max flow (median 28 vs 24 ml/sec) and continence rates (0% vs 20.8%) favored RASP (p < 0.05). Overall, Trifecta rate was similar in the two groups (76.1% vs 82.6%). Both HoLEP and RASP are safe and effective treatments for symptomatic BPH. HoLEP demonstrated to have lower perioperative risks while is affecting by a higher probability of transient early UI. On the other hand, RASP is more effective in reducing postoperative ejaculatory dysfunction.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy and laser enucleation of prostate for large benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Laser enucleation of the prostate (LEP) and robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) are two main treatment methods for large benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), but the superiority between these two methods in treating large BPH is currently unclear. This study aims to conduct a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and the safety of LEP and RASP in treating large BPH. We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for studies that compared safety and efficacy outcomes of both LEP and RASP. Review Manager 5.3 was used for the meta-analysis. Six studies with a total of 1235 patients were included in the analysis. Resected adenoma weight was similar in LEP than RASP group. Operative time [mean difference (MD) -67.96; 95% confidence interval [CI] -131.66 to -4.25; p = 0.04], catheterization time (MD -6.31; 95% CI -9.44 to -3.18; p < 0.0001), and length of stay (MD -2.44; 95% CI -3.55 to -1.34; p < 0.0001) were lower in LEP. The International Prostate Symptom Score, maximum urinary flow rate, prostate-specific antigen, and post-void residual urine volume were also comparable between two groups. Furthermore, LEP demonstrated lesser hemoglobin decrease (MD -0.50; 95% CI -0.96 to -0.05; p = 0.03), lower blood transfusion rate [odd ratio (OR) 0.23, 95% CI 0.08-0.66; p = 0.006], and lower rate of Clavien-Dindo Grade ≥ 3 complications (OR 0.435, 95% CI 0.189-0.998; p = 0.049). Finally, there was no significant difference in overall complications between two groups. Current evidence shows that LEP offers favorable perioperative outcomes compared with RASP. However, there was no conclusive evidence that LEP was advantaged in terms of efficacy outcomes.

Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy with Bladder Neck-Sparing Technique

Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy with Bladder Neck-Sparing Technique

Comparative analysis of robot-assisted simple prostatectomy: the HUGO™ RAS system versus the DaVinci® Xi system.

Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy (RASP) has emerged as a promising alternative in the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). However, there is currently a lack of comparative studies evaluating different robotic platforms for performing RASP. Therefore, we aimed to compare perioperative and functional outcomes of RASP performed using the HUGO™ RAS System versus the DaVinci® Xi System. Forty consecutive cases of RASP performed between May 2021 and March 2023 with the HUGO™ RAS and the DaVinci® Xi at OLV Hospital (Aalst, Belgium) were included in this retrospective study. All surgeries were performed by three experienced surgeons using the same approach. Baseline characteristics, peri-operative and functional outcomes were collected and compared between the two groups. The population was equally divided between the two groups with 20 patients in each group. There were no significant differences in preoperative patient characteristics between the two groups, except for the presence of bladder stones prior to the surgery (p = 0.03). No significant differences in total operative time and console time between the two groups were reported (p = 0.3). No cases required conversion to open surgery or additional port placement. During one case performed with the HUGO™ RAS, a malfunctioning monopolar curved shear had to be replaced. However, there was no statistically significant differences in terms of technical robotic problems between the groups (p = 0.3). There was no significant difference between the two groups in perioperative and functional outcomes (all p ≥ 0.2). We did not observe any statistically significant difference in perioperative and functional outcomes in case of RASP performed with the HUGO™ RAS System and with the DaVinci® Xi System. These findings provide compelling support for considering the HUGO™ RAS as a promising tool for robot-assisted procedures, thereby expanding the utilization of robotics for benign conditions.

Efficacy and safety of transurethral thulium laser enucleation versus robot-assisted prostatectomy for large-volume benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

To compare perioperative outcomes between Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and robotic-assisted simple pasta-ectomy (RASP)for large-volume benign prostatic hyperplasia(> 80ml). In August 2023, we undertook a comprehensive search of major global databases including PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar, focusing solely on articles written in English. Studies that were merely reviews or protocols without any specific published data were omitted. Furthermore, articles that comprised conference abstracts or content not pertinent to our subject of study were also disregarded. To calculate the inverse variances and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for categorical variables' mean differences, we employed the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel approach along with random-effects models. The findings were denoted in the form of odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs. A p-value less than 0.05 was deemed to indicate statistical significance. Our finalized meta-analysis incorporated six articles, including one randomized controlled trial (RCT) and five cohort studies. These studies accounted for a total of 1218 patients, 944 of whom underwent Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP) and 274 who underwent Robotic-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy (RASP). The pooled analysis from these six papers demonstrated that compared to RASP, HoLEP had a shorter hospital stay, shorter catheterization duration, and a lower blood transfusion rate. Moreover, HoLEP patients exhibited a smaller reduction in postoperative hemoglobin levels. Statistically, there were no significant differences between the two procedures regarding operative time, postoperative PSA, the weight of prostate specimens, IPSS, Qmax, PVR, QoL, and postoperative complications. (HoLEP) and (RASP) are both effective and safe procedures for treating large-volume benign prostatic hyperplasia. HoLEP, with its benefits of shorter catheterization and hospitalization duration, lesser decline in postoperative hemoglobin, and reduced blood transfusion needs, stands as a preferred choice for treating extensive prostate enlargement. However, further validation through more high-quality clinical randomized trials is required.

PJY01 - Comparison of perioperative and short-terms outcomes of en-bloc HoLEP and robot-assisted simple prostatectomy: A propensity-score matching analysis

PJY01 - Comparison of perioperative and short-terms outcomes of en-bloc HoLEP and robot-assisted simple prostatectomy: A propensity-score matching analysis

PE003 - Retzius-sparing Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy (RASP) in the treatment of male patients with lower urinary tract symptoms due to large benign prostatic enlargement.

PE003 - Retzius-sparing Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy (RASP) in the treatment of male patients with lower urinary tract symptoms due to large benign prostatic enlargement.

VE05 - Initial experience of robot-assisted simple prostatectomy with Hugo™ RAS system: Step-by-step description of two different techniques

VE05 - Initial experience of robot-assisted simple prostatectomy with Hugo™ RAS system: Step-by-step description of two different techniques

PJY02 - Single-port transvesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy a multi-institutional series from the SPARC

PJY02 - Single-port transvesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy a multi-institutional series from the SPARC

Initial Experience of Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy with Hugo Robot-Assisted Surgery System: Step-by-Step Description of Two Different Techniques.

Introduction: There are only a few clinical data on nononcologic procedures performed with the new Hugo™ robot-assisted surgery (RAS) system. Robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) is a minimally invasive treatment option for benign prostatic hyperplasia, and it demonstrated equal early functional and better perioperative outcomes as compared with open simple prostatectomy. In this article, we reported the first large series of RASP performed with Hugo RAS system. Methods: This Supplementary Video S1 is a step-by-step description of two different techniques for RASP. We analyzed the data of 20 consecutive patients who underwent RASP at OLV Hospital (Belgium) between February 2022 and March 2023. Patients baseline characteristics, perioperative and pathologic, and 1-month postoperative outcomes were reported, using the median (interquartile range [IQR]) and frequencies, as appropriate. Results: Median age (IQR) and preoperative prostate specific antigen (PSA) were 72 (67-76) years, and 7.7 (5.0-13.4) ng/mL, respectively. A total of 11 patients experienced an episode of preoperative acute urinary retention, and 8 men had an indwelling bladder catheter at the time of the surgery. No intraoperative complication occurred, and there was no need for conversion to open surgery. Median operative and console time were 165 (121-180) and 125 (101-148) minutes. On the first postoperative day the urethral catheter was removed in 80% of the patients. Median length of stay was 3 (3-4) days. Three patients had minor postoperative complications. On final pathology report, median prostate volume was 120 (101-154) g. On postoperative uroflowmetry, median Qmax and postvoid residual were 16 (13-26) mL/s and 15 (0-34) mL, respectively. Conclusions: This series represents the first report of surgical outcomes of RASP executed with Hugo RAS system. Awaiting study with longer follow-up, our study suggests that Hugo RAS has multiple applications, and it can ensure optimal outcomes in nononcologic procedures.

Urethra-Sparing Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy for Postoperative Antegrade Ejaculation.

We report a comparative analysis of extraperitoneal urethra-sparing robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (EUS-RASP) versus robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) using the Freyer approach for patients with a large prostate volume greater than 80 mL. A total of 32 patients underwent EUS-RASP, and 30 underwent RASP from April 2018 to November 2021. All the perioperative data and 6-month follow-up data were collected prospectively. We retrospectively evaluated baseline characteristics and functional outcomes, including International Prostate Symptom Scores (IPSSs) and quality of life (QOL), maximum flow rate, and post-void residual volume, between the two groups. Sexual function was analyzed in the EUS-RASP group. The patients undergoing EUS-RASP and RASP had comparable baseline characteristics and functional outcomes. The EUS-RASP group showed a shorter operative time (123.4 ± 15.2 min vs. 133.7 ± 21.4 min, p = 0.034), length of hospital stay (2.9 ± 1.5 days vs. 4.6 ± 1.5 days, p = 0.001), and catheterization time (2.4 ± 1.7 days vs. 8.1 ± 2.4 days, p < 0.001). A total of 14/32 (43.8%) patients reported normal preoperative ejaculatory function in the EUS-RASP group, and 11/14 (78.6%) maintained antegrade ejaculation postoperatively. Extraperitoneal urethra-sparing RASP is an effective and feasible procedure that can improve voiding function and allow for the maintenance of ejaculatory function in patients with large prostates.

Surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: Thulium enucleation versus single-port transvesical robotic simple prostatectomy.

The objective of this work is to compare our outcomes using thulium laser enucleation of prostate (ThuLEP) to the single-port robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (SP RASP) in the surgical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). A retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 2017 through December 2021 of men who underwent SP RASP and ThuLEP performed by a single surgeon with an enucleation experience of >300 cases and extensive robotic experience. The primary outcome was changed in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were operative time, length of stay (LOS), change in post-void residuals (PVR), de novo stress- or urge-urinary incontinence (SUI, UUI), and rate of complications. One hundred two patients underwent surgery during the study period: 33 RASP and 69 ThuLEP. There was no difference in preoperative characteristics, including age and body mass index, between both groups. Changes in IPSS scores postoperatively were not significant between SP RASP versus ThuLEP (-17 vs. -14, p = 0.2956). SP RASP had a longer operative time (180 vs. 90 min, p < 0.0001). There was no difference in LOS (0 vs. 0days, p = 0.2904). There was no difference in change in PVR (-96 vs. -91 mL, p = 0.8504). SP RASP patients had significantly less postoperative SUI than ThuLEP (0 vs. 13 patients, p = 0.0083), while there was no difference in UUI between both groups (4 vs. 2 patients, p = 0.0843). There was no difference in 30-day complication rate (21.2% vs. 21.7%, p = 0.9517), although there were three ThuLEP patients with Clavien-Dindo Class III or higher complication. There was no difference in change in IPSS scores between the two groups. ThuLEP is associated with shorter postoperative catheter days and decreased operative times. Hospital LOS was equivalent. SP RASP demonstrates significantly improved continence rates. Though SP RASP is within the initial learning curve at our institution, early results demonstrate the role for this modality alongside ThuLEP in the treatment of large gland BPH.

Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate vs Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Patients with Extremely Large Prostates ≥200 cc: A Comparative Analysis.

Introduction and Objectives: Robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) are both well-established, minimally invasive surgical treatment options for lower urinary tract symptoms caused by benign prostatic enlargement. We have reported the first comparative analysis of both techniques in patients with prostates of ≥200 cc. Materials and Methods: Between 2009 and 2020 a total of 53 patients with a prostate volume of ≥200 cc were surgically treated at OLV Hospital Aalst (Belgium): 31 underwent RASP and 22 underwent HoLEP. Preoperative and postoperative assessments included uroflowmetry with maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) and postvoid residual volume (PVR), as well as the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and quality of life (IPSS-QoL). The complication rates were evaluated according to the Clavien-Dindo Classification. Results: Patients treated with RASP had significantly larger prostate volumes compared with HoLEP (median 226 cc vs 204.5 cc, p = 0.004). After a median follow-up of 14 months, both groups showed a significant improvement in the maximum flow rate (+10.60 mL/s vs +10.70 mL/s, p = 0.724) and a reduction of the IPSS score (-12.50 vs -9, p = 0.246) as well as improvement of the QoL (-3 vs -3, p = 0.880). Median operative time was similar in both groups (150 minutes vs 132.5 minutes, p = 0.665). The amount of resected tissue was lower in the RASP group (134.5 g vs 180 g, p = 0.029) and there was no significant difference in postoperative prostate-specific antigen (1.2 ng/mL vs 0.8 ng/mL, p = 0.112). Despite a similar median catheterization time (3 days vs 2 days, p = 0.748), the median hospitalization time was shorter in the HoLEP group (4 days vs 3 days, p = 0.052). Complication rates were similar in both groups (32% vs 36%, p = 0.987). Conclusion: Our results suggest similar outcomes for RASP and HoLEP in patients with very large prostates ≥200 cc. These findings will require external validation at other high-volume centers.