Comparison of Open Versus Robotically Assisted Cytoreductive Radical Prostatectomy for Metastatic Prostate Cancer

IntroductionCytoreductive radical prostatectomy (CRP) may offer a survival advantage, according to several retrospective analyses. However, no direct comparisons are available regarding the type of surgical approach (open vs. robotic) in the metastatic setting. To address intraoperative and postoperative complications of robotically assisted CRP relative to open CRP in patients with metastatic prostate cancer.Patients and MethodsWithin the National Inpatient Sample database (2008-2013), we identified patients with metastatic prostate cancer who underwent robotically assisted versus open CRP. Multivariable logistic regression, multivariable Poisson regression models, and linear regression models were used.ResultsOf 874 patients who underwent CRP, 412 (47.1%) versus 462 (52.9%) underwent open versus robotically assisted CRP, respectively. Between 2008 and 2013, robotically assisted CRP rates increased from 7.6% to 50.0% (P = .5). In multivariable logistic regression models, robotically assisted CRP resulted in lower rates of overall (odds ratio [OR], 0.42; P < .001), miscellaneous medical (OR, 0.47; P = .02), and miscellaneous surgical complications (OR, 0.40; P = .04), as well as in lower rates of blood transfusions (OR, 0.19; P < .001). In multivariable Poisson regression models, robotically assisted CRP was associated with shorter stay (OR, 0.72; P < .001) and higher total hospital charges ($2483 more for each robotic surgery; P < .001). Similar results were recorded after adjustment for clustering.ConclusionThe intraoperative and postoperative complications associated with robotically assisted CRP are lower than those of open CRP. Similarly, robotically assisted CRP is associated with shorter stay. Conversely, an increase in total hospital charges is associated with robotically assisted CRP. Nonetheless, the complication profile of robotically assisted CRP validates its safety and feasibility.