Abstract
Background/Objectives: Radical prostatectomy is a standard treatment for localized prostate cancer. We aimed to compare perioperative outcomes and functional results between laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 120 patients who underwent LRP (n = 60) or RARP (n = 60). Perioperative parameters, including operative time, hospitalization duration, blood transfusion rate, wound healing complications, urinary catheterization duration, urinary tract infections (UTIs), and urinary incontinence, were assessed. Statistical analyses included Student's t-, Mann-Whitney U, and χ(2) tests. Results: RARP was associated with significantly shorter operative time, compared with LRP (147.25 vs. 188.30 min, p < 0.0001). No significant differences were observed in hospitalization duration, transfusion rates, or overall complication rates. However, impaired wound healing was less frequent in the RARP group, with a 10% lower incidence, compared with the LRP group (p = 0.0946). Similarly, UTIs occurred less often in the RARP group (six vs. one cases; p = 0.0544). Urinary incontinence was significantly less frequent following RARP, with its incidence being more than twice as low, compared with the LRP group (p = 0.0032). Additionally, the RARP group had significantly lower International Prostate Symptom Scores, with a mean difference of 7.83 points, indicating improved urinary function. No significant differences were found in sexual function (IIEF-5 scores). Conclusions: RARP offers advantages over LRP, including reduced operative time, lower rates of wound healing complications, decreased incidence of urinary incontinence, and improved postoperative urinary function. Further studies with larger cohorts are warranted to confirm these findings and assess long-term functional and oncological outcomes.