Robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP): Does it make sense?

OBJECTIVE • To evaluate the outcome, feasibility and reproducibility of a robot-assisted (RA) approach for simple prostatectomy (SP) in cases of high-volume symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (HVS-BPH). PATIENTS AND METHODS • In all, 35 consecutive patients underwent RASP for HVS-BPH using a previously described technique. • The mean prostate volume on preoperative transrectal ultrasonography was 106.6 mL. • All but two patients (with bladder calculi) had an adenoma volume of > 65 mL and 27 (77.1%) > 80 mL. Nine patients (25.7%) had an indwelling catheter. • The mean International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) was 28. RESULTS • The median operative duration was 180 min and the mean hospital stay was 3.17 days. • The mean catheter duration was 7.4 days and discontinuous or continuous catheter irrigation was required in two and seven patients, respectively (25.1%). • In all, 10 patients (28.6%) had practically no blood loss. No patients had a transfusion. • The mean postoperative peak urinary fl ow was 18.9 mL/s ( P <0.001), while the mean IPSS was 7 ( P <0.001). • For costs, while superficially RASP appeared more expensive than open SP (OSP), when considering the higher costs of hospitalisation for OSP, RASP was cheaper. Also, bipolar-TURP costs in patients with large-volume prostates had rather similar costs to RASP. CONCLUSIONS • RASP is a feasible and reproducible procedure with outcome advantages when compared with the open or with other minimally invasive techniques (laser or laparoscopy). As a result, a RA approach is worth considering in cases of high-volume prostate adenomas. • Extending the indication of the RA approach, to the SP, requires firstly that the surgeon be proficient in RA surgery and secondly that as the incidence rate of HVS-BPH is low, the surgeon has had the opportunity to ' see the procedure'.