Comparison of functional outcomes after retropubic, laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A meta-analysis

Table 2 Comparative studies evaluating urinary continence recovery after retropubic radical prostatectomy or robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

Quality	Case, n	Ref.	Country	Age (yr)	BMI (kg/m2)	Prostate volume (mL, g)	Gleason score (biopsy)	PSA (ng/mL)	Study design	Continence definition	Data collection	Loss of follow-up (N/Y,%)	Urinary continence recovery, %(n)
													6 mo	12 mo
3/2/3(H)	RRP, 100	Tewari et al[34], 2003	United States	63.1 (42.8-72)	27.6 (17-41)	48.4 (24.2-70)	-	7.3 (1.9-35)	Prospective	0-1 safety	Interview	-	Median:160 d
	RARP, 200			59.9 (40-72)	27.7 (19-38)	58.8 (18-140)		6.4 (0.6-41)		pad			Median:44 da
3/2/2(H)	RRP, 105	Ficarra et al[35], 2008	Italy	65 (61-69)	26 (24-28)	40 (30-47)	-	6 (5-10)	Prospective	0 pad	ICIQ-UI	N	-	88.0 (92/105)
	RARP, 103			61 (57-67)	26 (24-28)	37.5 (30-48)		6.4 (4.6-9)						97.0a (100/103)
3/2/3(H)	RRP, 110	Ham et al[36], 2008	South Korea	66.9 ± 6.0	23.6 ± 1.8	-	-	55.2 ± 23.7	Prospective	0 pad	Validated	N	75.5 (83/110)	81.8 (90/110)
	RARP, 188			67.3 ± 6.2	23.6 ± 2.3			22.3 ± 34.3			questionnaire		87.2 (164/188)	92.0a (173/188)
3/1/2(M)	RRP, 75	Di Pierro et al[37], 2010	Switzerland	64.3 (59.1-68.0)	-	-	-	7.57 (5.1-10.4)	Prospective	0 pad	Institutional	Y, > 20%	83.0 (62/75)	80.0 (60/75)
	RARP, 75			62.8 (58.4-67.0)				7.72 (5.6-12.1)			questionnaire		95.0a (71/75)	89a (40/45)
1/1/1(L)	RRP, 235	Kim et al[10], 2011	South Korea	66.5 ± 5.7	-	18.2 ± 23.4	-	14.6 ± 22.1	Prospective	0 pad	Validated	-	Median: 4.3 mo
	RARP, 528			64.2 ± 7.3		15.2 ± 20.2		10.4 ± 16.0			questionnaire		Median: 3.7 mo
4/2/3(H)	RRP, 109	Geraerts et al[38], 2013	Belgium	62.22 ± 6.12	-	-	-	-	Prospective	24h pad	Validated	N	94.0 (102/109)	96.0 (105/109)
	RARP, 61			61.48 ± 6.08						test	questionnaire		95.0 (58/61)	97.0 (59/61)
2/1/2(M)	RRP, 62	Caballero et al[39], 2008	Spain	66.5 (62-69)	-	41 (30.15-52)	-	9.66 (7-16.6)	Retrospective	0 pad	Unspecified	Y, < 20%	45.9 (28/61)	-
	RARP, 60			56 (56-65.25)		29.5 (23-40)		7 (5.7-10)					60.0 (30/50)a
2/0/1(L)	RRP, 588	Krambeck et al[11], 2008	United States	61.0 (41.0-77.0)	-	-	-	5.0 (0.6-39.7)	Retrospective	0 pad	Institutional	Y, < 20%		93.7 (446/476)
	RARP, 294			61.0 (38.0-76.0)				4.9 (0.5-33.5)			questionnaire			91.8 (224/244)
3/1/2(M)	RRP, 240	Rocco et al[40], 2009	Italy	63 (46-77)	-	-	6 (4-10)	6.7 (0.7-22.0)	Retrospective	0-1 safety	Interview	Y, > 20%	83.0 (189/229)	88.0 (191/217)
	RARP, 120			63 (47-76)			6 (4-9)	6.9 (0.4-23.0)		pad			93.0a (102/110)	97.0a (77/79)
3/1/3(H)	RRP, 30	Ou et al[41], 2009	United States	70.03 ± 6.10	24.09 ± 3.28	15.89 ± 14.15	6.22 ± 1.62	-	Retrospective	0-1 safety	Unspecified	N	83.3 (25/30)	96.6 (29/30)
	RARP, 30			67.27 ± 6.21	24.22 ± 3.16	16.45 ± 18.80	6.13 ± 0.9			pad			96.7 (29/30)	100.0 (30/30)
3/2/3(H)	RRP, 176	Choo et al[42], 2013	South Korea	67 ± 6.25	24 ± 2.73	42 ± 18.82	-	7.6 ± 19.33	Retrospective	0-1 safety	Validated	N	92.0 (162/176)	96.0 (169/176)
	RARP, 77			66 ± 7.75	24 ± 2.55	41 ± 15.77		7.2 ± 13.19		pad	questionnaire		84.0 (65/77)	94.0 (72/77)
3/1/3(H)	RRP, 112	Son et al[43], 2013	South Korea	65.0 ± 6.1	24.3 ± 2.4	41.3 ± 30.0	-	-	Retrospective	0 pad	Validated	Y, < 20%	51.7 (49/94)	70.7 (66/94)
	RARP, 146			65.5 ± 6.7	24.5 ± 2.5	45.9 ± 16.3					questionnaire		87.5a (107/122)	94.5a (115/122)

^aP < 0.05. RRP: Retropubic radical prostatectomy; RARP: Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy; ICIQ-UI: International consultation of incontinence questionnaire-urinary incontinence.