Comparative Outcomes of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Structured Review

Radical prostatectomy is the most common therapy method used in the treatment of localized prostate cancer.There are three main approaches to this surgery: open radical prostatectomy (ORP), laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP), and robotassisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).The review will compare these techniques by assessing their different effects, such as oncologic control, perioperative outcomes, and functional recovery.Oncologic results of all these techniques are generally similar.The RARP is typically characterized by better functional recovery among all three methods.Despite having many benefits, the RARP requires higher costs and has limited access in some healthcare units.Although LRP is minimally invasive, it is less widely adopted due to the longer time it takes to fully master this technique.ORP is still an important approach in some settings, but has a higher morbidity rate and longer recovery time.In choosing between all the methods of treatment for a patient with prostate cancer, the patient's health status, the surgeon's expertise, and the ability of the institution should be considered.Research has to be continued, and the benefits and risks of all types of radical prostatectomy should be compared to guarantee that the best methods will be chosen for treating such a common neoplasm as prostate cancer.Aim of Study: to compare clinical outcomes of open, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy techniques.Main target areas include perioperative parameters, oncologic control, functional recovery, complication rates, and healthcare resource use, to determine the most effective and patient-centered surgical approach.