Demonstrates favorable continence recovery in patients undergoing a novel surgical technique, suggesting its potential as an effective alternative.
BACKGROUND/AIM: Retzius-sparing radical prostatectomy has demonstrated superior early continence recovery compared to standard approaches in robotic series. We present the first large series of retzius-sparing retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RSR-LRP), a novel technique combining the benefits of the Retzius-sparing approach with extraperitoneal access. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between February 2022 and November 2025, 186 consecutive patients underwent RSR-LRP by a single surgeon. The technique involves a purely extraperitoneal approach using five trocars, intrafascial dissection without electrocautery near the neurovascular bundle, and complete closure of the Retzius space. Continence was assessed at 2 and 6 months using a 4-point scale (0=no pads, 1=safety pad, 2=one pad/day, 3=≥2 pads/day). Erectile function was evaluated as percentage of preoperative erection quality. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 21.9 months (range=2.4-46.7 months). Clinical staging: 84.4% cT2, 5.4% cT3. Pathological staging: 71.5% pT2, 18.3% pT3a, 10.2% pT3b. At two months, complete continence (0 pads) was achieved in 55.7%, with social continence (≤1 pad/day) in 94.3%. At six months, complete continence reached 94.4% with 99.4% social continence. PSA nadir <0.1 ng/ml was achieved in 86.6% of patients with available data. Positive surgical margin rate was 25.3% overall, with 75% of positive margins ≤3 mm. Of patients with erectile function data, 96% reported any erection recovery and 31% achieved erection ≥75% sufficient for intercourse. CONCLUSION: RSR-LRP demonstrates excellent functional outcomes with rapid continence recovery, comparable to reported robotic Retzius-sparing series. This technique offers a viable alternative for centers without robotic platforms, achieving favorable oncological control in locally advanced disease.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bosas et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: