Outcome measures after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

Abstract

Prostate cancer is the third most common malignancy in men worldwide, and the second most frequent cause of death from cancer in the United States. The introduction and evolution of the robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has challenged the open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) as the gold standard treatment for organ-confined disease worldwide. As with any new technology, comparison to the standard operative technique is imperative to determine its overall utility and justify its continued use. To this end, we compare short and long-term perioperative, oncologic, and quality of life outcomes of RARP to RRP. Given the lack of standardization of outcomes definitions and clinical assessment, we suggest methods for improvement of the academic assessment of surgical techniques and outcomes of radical prostatectomy. Standardization of data collection will not only facilitate accurate comparison of outcomes but will aid in the improvement of surgical technique and the individual surgeon’s ability to perform self-assessment. Before RARP can attain widespread acceptance as the alternative to the current gold standard, comparable or improved perioperative, oncologic, and quality of life outcomes must be assured.