Is the transition from open to robotic prostatectomy fair to your patients? A single-surgeon comparison with 2-year follow-up

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is a procedure thought to require experience with a significant number of cases before mastering. Most RARP series examine outcomes after the learning curve or by combining results from multiple surgeons. We review a single surgeon’s experience during the transition from open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) to RARP using a matched case–control model. We prospectively analyzed 50 RARP cases and made comparison with the last 50 consecutive RRP cases. Operative time was longer for RARP than RRP (341 versus 235 min, p < 0.01), and mean estimated blood loss was less for RARP than RRP (533 versus 1,540 ml, p < 0.01). There was a trend towards fewer positive surgical margins (PSM) for RARP (10%) than RRP (24%; p = 0.06). High-risk patients were found to have a greater percentage of PSM following RRP (70%) in comparison with RARP (17%; p = 0.04). The number of patients who experienced complications was no different between groups (16 versus 12, p = 0.37). Erectile function at 12, 18, and 24 months showed no difference between groups (p = 0.15, 0.92, and 0.23, respectively). There was no difference in continence at 1 year (88.6% versus 89.1%; p = 0.94). During 27.1 months of follow-up for the RARP group and 30.4 months for the RRP group, 92% and 94% of patients had an undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (defined as ≤0.1), respectively (p = 0.38). We report similar outcomes in patients undergoing RARP by a surgeon transitioning from RRP to RARP, confirming that the learning curve does not affect patient outcomes over a 2-year follow-up.