Perioperative and functional outcomes following robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: Descriptive analysis of Indian study group on partial nephrectomy database.

Introduction: There is an unmet need for high-quality data for Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in the Indian population. Indian study group on partial nephrectomy (ISGPN) is a consortium of Indian centers contributing to the partial nephrectomy (PN) database. The current study is a descriptive analysis of perioperative and functional outcomes following RAPN. Methods: For this study, the retrospective ISGPN database was reviewed, which included patients who underwent RAPN for renal masses at 14 centers across India from September 2010 to September 2022. Demographic, clinical, radiological, perioperative, and functional data were collected and analyzed. Ethics approval was obtained from each of the participating centers. Results: In this study, 782 patients were included, and 69.7% were male. The median age was 53 years (interquartile range [IQR 44-62]), median operative time was 180 min (IQR 133-240), median estimated blood loss was 100 mL (IQR 50-200), mean warm ischemia time was 22.7 min and positive surgical margin rates were 2.5%. The complication rate was 16.2%, and most of them were of minor grade. Trifecta and pentafecta outcomes were attained in 61.4% and 60% of patients, respectively. Conclusions: This is the largest Indian multi-centric study using the Indian Robotic PN Collaborative database to evaluate the outcomes of robot-assisted PN, and has proven its safety and efficacy in the management of renal masses.

Corrigendum to "RPN (Radius, Position of tumour, iNvasion of renal sinus) Classification and Nephrometry Scoring System: An Internationally Developed Clinical Classification To Describe the Surgical Difficulty for Renal Masses for Which Robotic Partial Nephrectomy Is Planned" [Eur. Urol. Open Sci. 54 (2023) 33-42].

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.05.007.].

Off-clamp Versus On-clamp Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review and Quantitative Synthesis by the European Association of Urology Young Academic Urologists Renal Cancer Study Group.

Context: The superiority of off-clamp robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) over the on-clamp technique has recently been questioned by randomized controlled trials comparing the two techniques. Objective: To systematically review the recent literature and perform a quantitative synthesis of data on the comparison of off-clamp versus off-clamp hilar control during RAPN. Evidence acquisition: A systematic search was performed in the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus databases for studies comparing off-clamp versus on-clamp RAPN in terms of perioperative and functional outcomes. The study protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42023413160). Only prospective randomized controlled trials and retrospective matched observational studies were included. The primary outcome of the study was the percentage decrease in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Evidence synthesis: A total of 11 studies were included involving a total of 2483 patients (944 patients in the off-clamp and 1539 patients in the on-clamp group). There was no difference between the two groups in the percentage decline in eGFR (mean difference [MD] 0.04%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.7% to 3.86%; p = 0.98). There were so significant differences between the groups for length of hospital stay (p = 0.56), complications (p = 0.08), conversion to open or radical surgery (p = 0.18), estimated blood loss (p = 0.06), or need for blood transfusion (p = 0.07). The operative time was shorter in the off-clamp group (MD-21.89 min, 95% CI -42.5 to -1.27; p = 0.04) but after sensitivity analysis the difference was no longer statistically significant (p = 0.15). The positive surgical margin rate was significantly lower in the off-clamp group (odds ratio 0.6, 95% CI 0.39-0.91; p = 0.02). Conclusions: Our review revealed no clinically relevant differences in perioperative and functional outcomes between off-clamp and on-clamp RAPN. Patient summary: In this review, we compared the two methods of controlling the kidney blood vessels during robot-assisted surgery to remove part of the kidney. We noted that there was no difference between the two groups for outcomes such as complications and the decrease in kidney function after surgery.

Off-clamp Versus On-clamp Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy: A Propensity-matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Partial nephrectomy is the preferred treatment option for the management of small renal masses. On-clamp partial nephrectomy is associated with a risk of ischemia and a greater loss of postoperative renal function, while the off-clamp procedure decreases the duration of renal ischemia, leading to better renal function preservation. However, the efficacy of the off- versus on-clamp partial nephrectomy for renal function preservation remains debatable. OBJECTIVE: To compare perioperative and functional outcomes following off- and on-clamp robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This study used the prospective multinational collaborative Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative (VCQI) database for RAPN. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary objective of this study was the comparison of perioperative and functional outcomes between patients who underwent off- and on-clamp RAPN. Propensity scores were calculated for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), renal nephrometry score (RNS) and preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of the 2114 patients, 210 had undergone off-clamp RAPN and others on-clamp procedure. Propensity matching was possible for 205 patients in a 1:1 ratio. After matching, the two groups were comparable for age, sex, BMI, tumor size, multifocality, tumor side, face of tumor, RNS, polar location of the tumor, surgical access, and preoperative hemoglobin, creatinine, and eGFR. There was no difference between the two groups for intraoperative (4.8% vs 5.3%, p = 0.823) and postoperative (11.2% vs 8.3%, p = 0.318) complications. Need for blood transfusion (2.9% vs 0, p = 0.030) and conversion to radical nephrectomy (10.2% vs 1%, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the off-clamp group. At the last follow-up, there was no difference between the two groups for creatinine and eGFR. The mean fall in eGFR at the last follow-up compared with that at baseline was equivalent between the two groups (-16.0 vs -17.3 ml/min, p = 0.985). CONCLUSIONS: Off-clamp RAPN does not result in better renal functional preservation. Alternatively, it may be associated with increased rates of conversion to radical nephrectomy and need for blood transfusion. PATIENT SUMMARY: With this multicentric study, we noted that performing robotic partial nephrectomy without clamping the blood supply to the kidney is not associated with better preservation of renal function. However, off-clamp partial nephrectomy is associated with increased rates of conversion to radical nephrectomy and blood transfusion.

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in morbidly obese patients: a VCQI database study.

To compare perioperative outcomes following robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in patients with morbid obesity (body mass index (BMI > 40 kg/m2)) and non-obese patients. Using the Vattikuti Collective quality initiative (VCQI) database for RAPN, data for morbidly obese and non-obese patients was obtained. Propensity scores were calculated for two treatment groups (morbidly obese vs. non-obese) for the following variables i.e. age, sex, tumor size, RNS, surgical access (retroperitoneal/transperitoneal) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) to ensure comparability. The primary outcome for the study was comparison of trifecta between the two groups. In this study, 158 morbidly obese patients were matched with 158 non-obese patients undergoing RAPN. Two groups matched well for age, sex, tumor size, eGFR and RNS. There was no difference between two groups for ischemia time, blood loss, blood transfusion, conversion to radical nephrectomy, length of stay, intraoperative and postoperative complications. Operative time was longer in morbidly obese patients (median 210 min vs. 120 min, p = 0.000). On pathological analysis, malignant tumors were more likely in the morbidly obese group (83.1% vs.73.4%, p = 0.018). Trifecta outcomes were comparable between the two groups (60.1% vs. 63.3%, p = 0.563). The Median duration of follow-up was 12 months (1-96 months). The morbidly obese group had significantly higher day one creatinine (1.25 ± 0.7 vs. 1.07 ± 0.37, p = 0.001) and significantly lower day one eGFR (62.1 ± 19 vs. 69.2 ± 21, p = 0.018). However, there was no difference between the two groups for the last follow-up creatinine and eGFR. RAPN in morbidly obese patients is associated with equivalent perioperative outcomes compared to non-obese patients.

Trifecta and pentafecta outcomes following robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in a multi-institutional cohort of Indian patients.

Introduction: The literature on studies reporting trifecta or pentafecta outcomes following robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in Indian patients is limited. The primary aim of this study was to report and evaluate the factors predicting trifecta and pentafecta outcomes following RAPN in Indian patients using the multicentric Vattikuti collective quality initiative (VCQI) database. Methods: From the VCQI database for patients who underwent RAPN, data for Indian patients were extracted and analyzed for factors predicting the achievement of trifecta and pentafecta following RAPN. Trifecta was defined as the absence of complications, negative surgical margins, and warm ischemia period shorter than 25 min or zero ischemia. Pentafecta covers all the trifecta criteria as well as >90% preservation of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and no stage upgrade of chronic kidney disease at 12 months. Results: In this study, among 614 patients, the trifecta was achieved in 374 patients (60.9%) and pentafecta was achieved in 24.2% of the patients. Patients who achieved trifecta had significantly higher mean age (54.1 vs. 51.0 years, P = 0.005), body mass index (BMI) (26.7 vs. 26.03 kg/m2, P = 0.022), and smaller tumor size (38.6 vs. 41.4 mm, P = 0.028). The preoperative eGFR (84.2 vs. 91.9 ml/min, P = 0.012) and renal nephrometry score (RNS) (6.96 vs. 7.87, P ≤ 0.0001) were significantly lower in the trifecta group. Comparing patients who achieved pentafecta to those who did not, we noted a statistically significant difference between the two groups for tumor size (36.1 vs. 41.5 mm, P = 0.017) and RNS (6.6 vs. 7.7, P = 0.0001). On multivariate analysis, BMI and RNS were associated with trifecta outcomes. Similarly, only RNS was identified as an independent predictor of pentafecta. Conclusions: RNS and BMI were independent predictors of the trifecta. At the same time, RNS was identified as an independent predictor of pentafecta following RAPN.

Development and Validation of a Nomogram Predicting Intraoperative Adverse Events During Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Ability to predict the risk of intraoperative adverse events (IOAEs) for patients undergoing partial nephrectomy (PN) can be of great clinical significance. OBJECTIVE: To develop and internally validate a preoperative nomogram predicting IOAEs for robot-assisted PN (RAPN). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this observational study, data for demographic, preoperative, and postoperative variables for patients who underwent RAPN were extracted from the Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative (VCQI) database. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: IOAEs were defined as the occurrence of intraoperative surgical complications, blood transfusion, or conversion to open surgery/radical nephrectomy. Backward stepwise logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of IOAEs. The nomogram was validated using bootstrapping, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and the goodness of fit. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to determine the clinical utility of the model. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Among the 2114 patients in the study cohort, IOAEs were noted in 158 (7.5%). Multivariable analysis identified five variables as independent predictors of IOAEs: RENAL nephrometry score (odds ratio [OR] 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-1.25); clinical tumor size (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.001-1.024); PN indication as absolute versus elective (OR 3.9, 95% CI 2.6-5.7) and relative versus elective (OR 4.2, 95% CI 2.2-8); Charlson comorbidity index (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.05-1.30); and multifocal tumors (OR 8.8, 95% CI 5.4-14.1). A nomogram was developed using these five variables. The model was internally valid on bootstrapping and goodness of fit. The AUC estimated was 0.76 (95% CI 0.72-0.80). DCA revealed that the model was clinically useful at threshold probabilities >5%. Limitations include the lack of external validation and selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and internally validated a nomogram predicting IOAEs during RAPN. PATIENT SUMMARY: We developed a preoperative model than can predict complications that might occur during robotic surgery for partial removal of a kidney. Tests showed that our model is fairly accurate and it could be useful in identifying patients with kidney cancer for whom this type of surgery is suitable.

Perioperative outcomes following robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for complex renal masses: A Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative database study.

Introduction: Outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) depend on tumor complexity, surgeon experience and patient profile among other variables. We aimed to study the perioperative outcomes of RAPN for patients with complex renal masses using the Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative (VCQI) database that allowed evaluation of multinational data. Methods: From the VCQI, we extracted data for all the patients who underwent RAPN with preoperative aspects and dimensions used for an anatomical (PADUA) score of ≥10. Multivariate logistic regression was conducted to ascertain predictors of trifecta (absence of complications, negative surgical margins, and warm ischemia times [WIT] <25 min or zero ischemia) outcomes. Results: Of 3,801 patients, 514 with PADUA scores ≥10 were included. The median operative time, WIT, and blood loss were 173 (range 45-546) min, 21 (range 0-55) min, and 150 (range 50-3500) ml, respectively. Intraoperative complications and blood transfusions were reported in 2.1% and 6%, respectively. In 8.8% of the patients, postoperative complications were noted, and surgical margins were positive in 10.3% of the patients. Trifecta could be achieved in 60.7% of patients. Clinical tumor size, duration of surgery, WIT, and complication rates were significantly higher in the group with a high (12 or 13) PADUA score while the trifecta was significantly lower in this group (48.4%). On multivariate analysis, surgical approach (retroperitoneal vs. transperitoneal) and high PADUA score (12/13) were identified as predictors of the trifecta outcomes. Conclusion: RAPN may be a reasonable surgical option for patients with complex renal masses with acceptable perioperative outcomes.

Perioperative outcomes following robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in elderly patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare perioperative outcomes following robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in patients with age ≥ 70 years to age < 70 years. METHODS: Using Vattikuti Collective quality initiative (VCQI) database for RAPN we compared perioperative outcomes following RAPN between the two age groups. Primary outcome of the study was to compare trifecta outcomes between the two groups. Propensity matching using nearest neighbourhood method was performed with trifecta as primary outcome for sex, body mass index (BMI), solitary kidney, tumor size and Renal nephrometery score (RNS). RESULTS: Group A (age ≥ 70 years) included 461 patients whereas group B included 1932 patients. Before matching the two groups were statistically different for RNS and solitary kidney rates. After propensity matching, the two groups were comparable for baselines characteristics such as BMI, tumor size, clinical symptoms, tumor side, face of tumor, solitary kidney and tumor complexity. Among the perioperative outcome parameters there was no difference between two groups for operative time, blood loss, intraoperative transfusion, intraoperative complications, need for radical nephrectomy, positive margins and trifecta rates. Warm ischemia time was significantly longer in the younger age group (18.1 min vs. 16.3 min, p = 0.003). Perioperative complications were significantly higher in the older age group (11.8% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.041). However, there was no difference between the two groups for major complications. CONCLUSION: RAPN in well-selected elderly patients is associated with comparable trifecta outcomes with acceptable perioperative morbidity.

Adjuvant versus early Salvage radiation therapy for prostate cancer with adverse pathological features on radical prostatectomy-Do we finally have an answer?

Background: The presence of adverse pathological features like extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle involvement, or positive margins at radical prostatectomy incurs a high risk of postoperative recurrence. Currently, adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) is the standard of care in these patients, while early salvage radiotherapy (eSRT) is a potential alternative strategy. Aims: The purpose of this paper is to review the latest evidence comparing outcomes of adjuvant versus early SRT in this clinical scenario. Materials and Methods: A systematic review of Google Scholar, PubMed/Medline, and EMBASE was done to identify relevant studies published in the English language, regarding outcomes of adjuvant radiotherapy and early SRT in post radical prostatectomy patients. Twelve studies, including six randomized trials, four retrospective studies, one systematic review, and one metanalysis were included in the final analysis. Results: We found that initial randomized trials demonstrated better event-free survival with adjuvant radiotherapy when compared to observation alone. However, ART was associated with increased risk of overtreatment and thus increased radiation-related toxicity rates. Conclusion: Preliminary evidence from recently reported RCTs suggests that eSRT may provide equivalent oncological outcomes to ART in prostate cancer patients with adverse pathology on radical prostatectomy while decreasing unnecessary treatment and radiation-related toxicity in a significant proportion of patients. However, the final verdict would be delivered after the long-term metastasis-free survival and overall survival outcomes are available.

Development and internal validation of preoperative and postoperative nomograms predicting quadrifecta outcomes following robotic radical prostatectomy.

Introduction: Literature on the factors predicting functional and oncological outcomes following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is sparse for the Indian population. Hence, the primary objective of this study was to develop preoperative and postoperative nomograms predicting these outcomes in patients with prostate cancer undergoing RARP. Methods: This retrospective analysis identified the predictors of quadrifecta outcomes, i.e., the patients who did not have complications, were continent, had negative surgical margins, and were biochemical recurrence free with at least 1 year of follow-up following RARP. We excluded the return of sexual potency as the majority of the patients in our series were sexually inactive preoperatively. We used the backward stepwise logistic regression analysis method to identify the predictors of quadrifecta. Preoperative and postoperative nomograms using these predictors were developed and validated with bootstrapping, goodness of fit, calibration plot, decision curve analysis (DCA), and theits receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Results: Of the 688 patients who underwent RARP, 399 were included in this study, and 123 (30.8%) of these achieved the quadrifecta outcomes. Preoperative nomogram was developed using four variables, i.e., prostate-specific antigen (PSA), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), biopsy Gleason score, and clinical stage. Postoperative nomogram included PSA, CCI, pathological tumor stage, tumor grade, and positive lymph node. Both the models were internally valid on bootstrapping, calibration plots, and goodness of fit. On the ROC analysis, preoperative and postoperative nomograms had an area under the curve of 0.71 and 0.79, respectively. On the DCA, at a threshold probability of 5%, both the models showed a net benefit. Conclusions: We developed and validated accurate nomograms for predicting quadrifecta outcomes following RARP for the Indian population.

Comparison of perioperative outcomes following transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a propensity-matched analysis of VCQI database.

OBJECTIVE: To compare perioperative outcomes following retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPRAPN) and transperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (TPRAPN). METHODS: With this Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative (VCQI) database, study propensity scores were calculated according to the surgical access (TPRAPN and RPRAPN) for the following independent variables, i.e., age, sex, side of the surgery, RENAL nephrometry scores (RNS), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and serum creatinine. The study's primary outcome was the comparison of trifecta between the two groups. RESULTS: In this study, 309 patients who underwent RPRAPN were matched with 309 patients who underwent TPRAPN. The two groups matched well for age, sex, tumor side, polar location of the tumor, RNS, preoperative creatinine and eGFR. Operative time and warm ischemia time were significantly shorter with RPRAPN. Intraoperative blood loss and need for blood transfusion were lower with RPRAPN. There was a significantly higher number of intraoperative complications with RPRAPN. However, there was no difference in the two groups for postoperative complications. Trifecta outcomes were better with RPRAPN (70.2% vs. 53%, p < 0.0001) compared to TPRAPN. We noted no significant change in overall results when controlled for tumor location (anteriorly or posteriorly). The surgical approach, tumor size and RNS were identified as independent predictors of trifecta on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: RPRAPN is associated with superior perioperative outcomes in well-selected patients compared to TPRAPN. However, the data for the retroperitoneal approach were contributed by a few centers with greater experience with this technique, thus limiting the generalizability of the results of this study.

Diagnostic performance of minichromosome maintenance 5 (MCM5) in bladder cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Primary objective of this study was to determine diagnostic accuracy of minichromosome maintenance 5 (MCM5) protein in patients with bladder cancer (BC). In this review, we searched electronic databases to identify studies on the diagnostic accuracy of MCM5 in patients with BC. We pooled sensitivity and specificities using DerSimonian-Laird random-effect analysis and followed PRISMA guidelines while conducting this review (CRD42021255609). In this meta-analysis, eight prospective studies with 5,114 patients were included. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for MCM5 in predicting BC were 0.66 (0.56-0.75) and 0.72 (0.61-0.81). Subgroup analysis of five studies with 3,000 patients using ADXBLADDER revealed sensitivity and specificity of 0.61 (0.49-0.71) and 0.67 (0.51-0.80). Pooled sensitivity and specificity for primary diagnosis of BC were 0.74 (0.64-0.82) and 0.78 (0.67-0.86), respectively. For BC surveillance, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.58 (0.45-0.69) and 0.61 (0.48-0.73), respectively. Pooled sensitivities for low and high-grade tumors were 0.50 (0.36-0.64) and 0.79 (0.68-0.87), respectively. Pooled specificities for low and high-grade tumors were 0.79 (0.63-0.90) and 0.82 (0.65-0.92). MCM5 has an overall moderate diagnostic accuracy for detecting BC. Subgroup analysis revealed good diagnostic performance in patients with high-grade tumors and primary diagnosis of symptomatic patients.

Expert survey on management of prostate cancer in India: Real-world insights into practice patterns.

To gain insights on the diverse practice patterns and treatment pathways for prostate cancer (PC) in India, the Urological Cancer Foundation convened the first Indian survey to discuss all aspects of PC, with the objective of guiding clinicians on optimizing management in PC. A modified Delphi method was used, wherein a multidisciplinary panel of oncologists treating PC across India developed a questionnaire related to screening, diagnosis and management of early, locally advanced and metastatic PC and participated in a web-based survey (WBS) (n = 62). An expert committee meeting (CM) (n = 48, subset from WBS) reviewed the ambiguous questions for better comprehension and reanalyzed the evidence to establish a revote for specific questions. The threshold for strong agreement and agreement was ≥90% and ≥75% agreement, respectively. Sixty-two questions were answered in the WBS; in the CM 31 questions were revoted and 4 questions were added. The panelists selected answers based on their best opinion and closest to their practice strategy, not considering financial constraints and access challenges. Of the 66 questions, strong agreement was reached for 17 questions and agreement was achieved for 22 questions. There were heterogeneous responses for 27 questions indicative of variegated management approaches. This is one of the first Indian survey, documenting the diverse clinical practice patterns in the management of PC in India. It aims to provide guidance in the face of technological advances, resource constraints and sparse high-level evidence.

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in indian men of age 75 years and above: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Older men undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) have been thought to have worse perioperative, functional and oncological outcomes than younger men. However, there is a dearth of matched studies on this subject in the currently available literature. Our study is a matched pair analysis of perioperative, oncological and functional outcomes of RARP in men < 75 years of age versus ≥ 75 years (62 in each group). There was no statistically significant difference in complications, length of stay, pathological stage, positive surgical margins (PSM) and nodal involvement. Older men were less likely to undergo nerve sparing in our study (8.0 vs 75.8% p = 0.01). Potency rates were too low to be compared. The 1-year continence rates, time to continence and the proportion of men with biochemical recurrence (BCR) were similar between the groups. Men ≥ 75 years developed BCR much earlier than < 75 years (30 versus 78 months p = 0.07). However, this was not statistically significant. Age ≥ 75 years was associated with a statistically insignificant 53.5% rise in the risk of BCR. It was also not associated with any increased risk of postoperative complications or PSM. RARP is a safe procedure in senior adults. The oncological and functional outcomes of RARP in senior adults are similar to younger men.

Does prior transurethral resection of prostate affect the functional and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy? A matched-pair analysis.

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is challenging in men with prior history of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). Few studies analyze this peculiar group of patients, and hence we sought to investigate the outcome of RARP in post-TURP men. We interrogated our prospectively maintained database containing 643 patients who underwent RARP from January 2012 to December 2020. We matched 36 men with prior history of TURP consecutively to 72 men without prior TURP. The groups were matched for age, body mass index (BMI), Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), serum PSA, International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade groups and clinical stage. Men with prior history of stricture surgeries, pelvic radiation, ablative laser procedures, Urolift and Rezum were excluded from the study. Fisher's Exact test/Chi-square was used for the comparison of categorical variables. Mann-Whitney test (Independent group/Unpaired data) and Wilcoxon sign rank test (for paired data) were employed to analyze continuous variables. The complication rates, median day of drain removal and length of hospital stay were similar between the groups. The TURP group required bladder neck reconstruction twice as often as the non-TURP group (58.3% versus 29.1%, p = 0.0035) and a longer duration of postoperative catheterization (10 versus 8 days, p = 0.0005). The rate of positive surgical margins was higher in the TURP group (30.5% versus 25%, p = 0.5414), albeit statistically insignificant. Biochemical recurrence (BCR) at one year (48.8% versus 60%, p = 0.0644) and zero pad/one safety-pad continence rates at one, three, six and twelve months were also not significantly different (14.3%, 35.4%, 59.2%, 81.6% for non TURP group versus 9.1%, 28.6%, 53.6%, 76.0% for TURP group). On multivariate analysis, prior TURP was not associated with a higher risk of BCR, margin positivity or incontinence. The oncological and functional outcomes of RARP post-TURP are comparable to men without prior TURP.