Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • News & Views
  • Published:

Prostate cancer

Oncological vs functional outcomes for RARP—finding a balance

Nature Reviews Urology volume 10, pages 563–564 (2013)Cite this article

Subjects

Deviating from the most widely described approach for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), researchers have reported the exceptional outcomes of a Retzius-sparing approach in which they pass through the pouch of Douglas and avoid transecting all structures anterior to the prostate.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Trinh, Q. D. et al. Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open radical prostatectomy: results from the nationwide inpatient sample. Eur. Urol. 61, 679–685 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ficarra, V. et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur. Urol. 62, 418–430 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ficarra, V. et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur. Urol. 62, 405–417 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Novara, G. et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting oncologic outcome after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur. Urol. 62, 382–404 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Galfano, A. et al. Beyond the learning curve of the Retzius-sparing approach for robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncologic and functional results of the first 200 patients with >/=1 year of follow-up. Eur. Urol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.06.046.

  6. Menon, M. et al. Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: establishment of a structured programme and preliminary analysis of outcomes. J. Urol. 168, 945–949 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Galfano, A. et al. A new anatomic approach for robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a feasibility study for completely intrafascial surgery. Eur. Urol. 58, 457–461 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Trinh, Q. D. et al. A systematic review of the volume-outcome relationship for radical prostatectomy. Eur. Urol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.04.012.

  9. Hu, J. C. et al. Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy. JAMA 302, 1557–1564 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kowalczyk, K. J. et al. Temporal national trends of minimally invasive and retropubic radical prostatectomy outcomes from 2003 to 2007: results from the 100% Medicare sample. Eur. Urol. 61, 803–809 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. VUI Center for Outcomes Research Analytics and Evaluation, Henry Ford Health System, 2799 West Grand Boulevard, Detroit, 48202, MI, USA

    Jesse D. Sammon

  2. Division of Urologic Surgery and Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 45 Francis Street, ASB II-3, Boston, 02115, MA, USA

    Quoc-Dien Trinh

Authors
  1. Jesse D. Sammon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Quoc-Dien Trinh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Quoc-Dien Trinh.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sammon, J., Trinh, QD. Oncological vs functional outcomes for RARP—finding a balance. Nat Rev Urol 10, 563–564 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2013.217

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2013.217

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing: Cancer

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Cancer newsletter — what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Cancer