Open vs. robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: A single surgeon and pathologist comparison of pathologic and oncologic outcomes

ObjectiveTo compare the impact surgical technique has on clinicopathologic and oncologic outcomes among patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer.Materials and methodsUtilizing the experience of a single surgeon and pathologist, a retrospective review of 1,041 patients undergoing open (RRP) and robotic-assisted (RALP) radical prostatectomy between 1999 and 2010 with pathologic evaluation using whole-mount sectioning techniques and tumor mapping was performed from our prospective database. Differences in the incidence, location, and linear length of positive surgical margins were compared. Additionally, rates of biochemical relapse-free survival according to technique were assessed.ResultsA total of 357 RRP and 669 RALP patients were evaluated. The overall incidence of surgical margin positivity when stratified by stage of disease and location of positive margins was nearly identical between groups for organ confined disease. The apex and posterior surfaces represented the 2 most common locations for positive margins. RALP had notably fewer positive margins in pathologic T3 disease and a statistically shorter linear length of margin positivity among all patients. Short and intermediate-term biochemical-free survival rates were identical between groups.ConclusionsRALP is associated with operative oncologic control rates that compare very favorably to RRP. The data suggest that in the hands of an experienced surgeon, RALP has oncologic outcomes that are at least as good if not better than RRP.