67-6

31/93

Median Operative Time, min (IQR)Median EBL, g (IQR) Blood transfusionMedian LOS, day (IQR)Complications ≧３Positive surgical margin (PSM)Pathological stagepT2apT2bpT2cpT3apT3b≧Perioperative parametersEBL: estimated blood loss LOS: the length of hospital stayA: RRP (n=35)249 (222-279)615 (451-1095)14 (40%)18 (16-24)6 (17%)19 (54%)2 (6%)3 (9%)20 (57%)3 (9%)7 (20%)B: RARP (n=46)136 (117-161)115 (52-200)0 (0%)11 (11-13)1 (2%)16 (34%)5 (11%)2 (4%)19 (41%)11 (24%)9 (20%)The clinical and pathologic stage was similar among the groups (Table 1, Table 2). However, we noted a significantly greater incidence of PSM rates in the smaller RARP group compared with RRP group. (34% versus 54%, P =0.048). In RRP group, incontinence recovered 1 month after surgery in 5 cases (14%), recovered in 3 months in 13 cases (37%), and recovered in 6 months in 24 cases (69%), 29 cases (83%) recovered from incon-tinence at 12 months. The Kaplan–Meier curve of the time to recovery of urinary continence (UC) in each group is shown in Figure 1. The mean time to recovery of UC was no significantly difference among the two groups; 8 months in RRP group, 7 Figure 1　Kaplan-Meier curve shows the recovery urinary continence rate after RARP and RRP. There was no significant difference between the RARP and RRP groups.Table 2　Comparison of postoperative outcome between the 2 groupsmonths in RARP group (P = 0.082, Wilcoxon). Median follow-up was 7 months in the RARP group and 27.1 months in the RRP group. In our study of clinical data on perioperative outcomes of RARP and RRP were similar to previous reports in which RARP was associated with lower EBL, shorter lengths of LOS and lower or similar rates of PSM and complications.6, 7) RARP had a lower EBL than RRP, the reason is that RARP has meticulous dissection with 3D vision and pressure hemostasis due to pneumoperitoneum which made decrease the intraoperative blood loss. P-value0.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0480.294539Discussion