A systematic review of robot-assisted simple prostatectomy outcomes by prostate volume

Purpose The aim of our study is to assess the differences in functional outcomes during the perioperative and postoperative period after RASP depending on BPH volume. Methods We searched 2 databases: MEDLINE (PubMed) and Google Scholar using the following search query: robot* AND "simple prostatectomy". The search strategy and review protocol are available at Prospero (CRD42024508071). Results We included 25 articles published between 2008 and 2023. Preoperatively, patients with prostate size < 100 cm(3) had more severe symptoms while postoperatively all of them had only mild lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). In larger BPH, two authors reported moderate LUTS after RASP: Fuschi [1] (mean IPSS 8.09 +/- 2.41) and Stolzenburg [2] (mean IPSS 8 +/- 2.7). Postoperative Qmax was also noticeably higher in smaller BPH (mean value range 28.5-55.5 ml/s) compared to larger BPH (mean Qmax 18-29.6 ml/s), although in both groups it was within the normal range. Postoperative post-void residual (PVR) was normal as well except in one study by Stolzenburg et al. [2]. Blood loss was comparable between the groups. The complications rate in general was low. Conclusion RASP is effective in terms of subjective and objective urination indicators, and a safe procedure for BPH. In the lack of data on implementation of RASP in small prostate volumes, this procedure can be seen as an upper size <double left angle bracket>limitless >> treatment alternative. Currently, comparative data regarding prostate volume is lacking, and future trials with subgroups analysis related to BPH volume might help to address this issue.