The widespread dissemination of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) occurred despite the absence of high-level evidence supporting its safety and efficacy in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer.
FREE DAILY AND WEEKLY NEWSLETTERS OFFERED BY CONTENT OF INTEREST
Did you find this article relevant? Subscribe to UroToday-GUOncToday!
The fields of GU Oncology and Urology are advancing rapidly including new treatments, enrolling clinical trials, screening and surveillance recommendations along with updated guidelines. Join us as one of our subscribers who rely on UroToday as their must-read source for the latest news and data on drugs. Sign up today for blogs, video conversations, conference highlights and abstracts from peer-review publications by disease and condition delivered to your inbox and read on the go.
This study aims at systematically evaluating the models adopted in scientific reports assessing the comparative effectiveness of RARP versus open radical prostatectomy (ORP). Although several retrospective observational studies have assessed the comparative effectiveness of RARP and ORP, currently no published randomized data are available to comprehensively evaluate this issue. Furthermore, well-designed prospective investigations are needed to ultimately assess the benefits of RARP compared with other treatment modalities in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer.
Gandaglia G, Trinh QD. Are you the author?
Division of Oncology, Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Via Olgettina 57, Milan 20132, Italy; Division of Urologic Surgery and Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, 45 Francis St, ASB II-3, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Reference: Urol Clin North Am. 2014 Nov;41(4):597-606.