COMPARATIVE OUTCOMES OF ROBOTIC VS. OPEN SURGERY IN PROSTATE CANCER PATIENTS

Abstract

This study provides a comprehensive comparative analysis of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and open radical prostatectomy (ORP) in the treatment of localized prostate cancer, with a focus on perioperative safety, functional recovery, and oncological efficacy. Utilizing a retrospective quantitative design, clinical data from 300 patients were analyzed, equally divided between RARP and ORP groups. Results demonstrated that RARP was significantly associated with reduced intraoperative blood loss, lower transfusion rates, and shorter hospital stays compared to ORP. Functional outcomes were notably improved in the RARP cohort, with higher rates of urinary continence and erectile function recovery at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Additionally, oncological measures such as positive surgical margin rates and biochemical recurrence were more favorable in the robotic group. Quality-of-life assessments revealed superior patient-reported outcomes in urinary and sexual domains following RARP. Subgroup analysis further confirmed that the benefits of robotic surgery extended across various age brackets, with particularly strong functional recovery observed in younger patients. While both techniques demonstrated efficacy in cancer control, the overall advantages of RARP in terms of precision, reduced morbidity, and faster recovery support its growing adoption as the preferred surgical modality. These findings underscore the importance of integrating advanced surgical technologies to optimize patient outcomes in prostate cancer management, while also emphasizing the need for surgeon expertise and patient-specific decision-making in clinical practice.