Robotic Prostatectomy
A robot-assisted, keyhole operation that removes the prostate and seminal vesicles to treat localised or locally advanced prostate cancer.
Overview
Hospital & stay
Procedure details
How it's performed
Under general anaesthesia, six small ports are inserted into the lower abdomen and the patient is placed in steep Trendelenburg position. The da Vinci robotic arms are docked and the surgeon operates from a console, dissecting the bladder away from the prostate, dividing the dorsal venous complex, and removing the prostate, seminal vesicles and surrounding fascia. The neurovascular bundles are preserved when oncologically safe. The bladder neck is reconstructed and a vesico-urethral anastomosis is created over a urinary catheter. Pelvic lymph nodes are sampled if indicated.
Preparation
- 1Multidisciplinary review of biopsy histology, multiparametric MRI and (if indicated) PSMA-PET staging.
- 2Pre-operative bloods, ECG, group-and-save and anaesthetic assessment.
- 3Pelvic-floor exercises started 4-6 weeks before surgery to aid post-operative continence.
- 4Bowel preparation per local protocol; stop anticoagulants and antiplatelets as advised.
- 5Informed consent covering potential incontinence, erectile dysfunction and need for adjuvant therapy.
Recovery
- 1Day 0-1: Most patients are discharged within 24-48 hours of surgery.
- 2Days 1-7: Home with urethral catheter; light walking encouraged; no heavy lifting.
- 3Day 7-14: Catheter removal in clinic and first wound check.
- 4Weeks 2-6: Gradual return to office work; continue pelvic-floor exercises.
- 5Weeks 6-12: First post-operative PSA and continence assessment.
- 6Months 3-12: Continence usually returns by 3-6 months; erectile function recovery is monitored with phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors and rehabilitation as needed.
Clinics offering Robotic Prostatectomy
Related procedures
Related procedures
Clinical evidence for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
12 peer-reviewed sourcesRobot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has become the most common surgical approach for localized prostate cancer in many centers, and a substantial evidence base now compares it with open and laparoscopic surgery. Meta-analyses and systematic reviews generally report comparable cancer-control outcomes alongside advantages in blood loss and recovery, while continence and erectile function recovery depend on nerve-sparing technique, tumor characteristics, and surgeon volume. The references below cover comparative effectiveness, functional recovery, oncological results, and emerging refinements such as NeuroSAFE-guided and Retzius-sparing approaches. Surgeon experience is a recurring factor in outcomes, underscoring the value of high-volume, specialized centers. These studies describe population-level findings, and individual results vary with cancer stage and overall health.
- Comparative functional, perioperative and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted and open radical prostatectomy
- NeuroSAFE-guided robot-assisted radical prostatectomy versus standard RARP: systematic review and meta-analysis
- Minimally invasive radical prostatectomy versus open radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis
- Comparative effectiveness of robotic and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a GRADE-assessed systematic review and meta-analysis
- Lower urinary tract symptoms after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Compiled from peer-reviewed medical literature indexed on PubMed. This overview is for general education and is not medical advice. · Last updated 2026-06-15

