What question did this study set out to answer?

The study aims to compare outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy using three different robotic platforms: Da Vinci, Hugo RAS, and Versius.

March 21, 2026Open Access

Six-month outcomes of a three-arm prospective study comparing Da Vinci vs. Hugo RAS vs. versius robotic radical prostatectomy: (the COMPAR-P trial)

Key Points

The study aims to compare outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy using three different robotic platforms: Da Vinci, Hugo RAS, and Versius.
Conducted as a prospective, monocentric trial at a hospital in Italy.
Involved 150 patients with organ-confined prostate cancer, equally divided among three robotic systems.
Utilized standardized surgical techniques and protocols across all groups.
Outcomes assessed at 6 months included PSA levels, complications, and patient-reported quality of life.
Applied linear mixed-effects models for longitudinal outcome analysis.
Most patients had undetectable PSA levels at 6 months, with no significant differences among groups.
Low complication rates and late effects were consistent across robotic platforms.
At 1 month, Hugo RAS and Versius reported lower Sexual Function scores than Da Vinci; differences resolved by 3 and 6 months.
Hugo RAS showed temporary improvement in Physical Functioning at 1 month compared to Da Vinci.

Abstract

To compare postoperative, oncological, and patient-reported outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) performed with three CE-marked robotic platforms: Da Vinci Xi, Hugo RAS, and Versius. The COMPAR-P trial is a prospective, monocentric, post-market study conducted at the Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata of Verona, Italy (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05766163). From March 2023, 150 patients with organ-confined prostate cancer were consecutively enrolled and allocated to undergo RARP with Da Vinci Xi (n = 50), Hugo RAS (n = 50), or Versius (n = 50). Two high-volume robotic surgeons performed all procedures, experienced with Da Vinci but naïve to Hugo RAS and Versius before trial initiation. Surgical technique, perioperative protocols, and follow-up were standardized across cohorts. Outcomes at 6 months included serum PSA, complications (Clavien–Dindo classification), late sequelae (> 90 days), and health-related quality of life (SF-36 and UCLA-PCI questionnaires). Longitudinal analyses used linear mixed-effects models. Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were comparable across groups. At 6 months, PSA was undetectable in most patients, with no significant intergroup differences. Complication rates and late sequelae were low and evenly distributed. Questionnaire completion exceeded 90% at all time points. No significant long-term differences emerged in most SF-36 and UCLA-PCI domains. However, at 1 month, Hugo RAS and Versius patients reported lower Sexual Function scores than Da Vinci (–20 and − 28 points, respectively), and Versius patients reported lower Sexual Bother scores (–25 points, all p < 0.05). These differences disappeared at 3 and 6 months. Hugo RAS patients showed a temporary advantage in Physical Functioning at 1 month (+ 17 points vs. Da Vinci). Within the present study, and notwithstanding its inherent limitations, Da Vinci, Hugo RAS, and Versius achieved comparable safety, oncological, and short-term patient-reported outcomes in RARP. Early functional differences were transient and resolved over time. Surgical expertise, rather than the platform type, appears to be the primary determinant of outcomes.

Bookmark

View Full Paper