Open, Laparoscopic, and Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy Oncological Results: A Reverse Systematic Review

Context: Systematic reviews (SR) have always been used as the best evidence to compare three radical prostatectomy (RP) techniques: retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP), laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP), and robotic radical prostatectomy (RARP). Despite the superiority of minimally invasive surgery in relation to perioperative outcomes, the literature still cannot establish which technique is superior in relation to oncological outcomes. A new methodology called Reverse Systematic Review (RSR) was created to gather the best evidence in the literature based on a heterogeneous sample, allowing the comparison of oncological outcomes from a population point of view. Objective: To apply the RSR to compare RP techniques in relation to oncological outcomes: positive surgical margin (PSM) and biochemical recurrence rate (BCR). Evidence Acquisition: A search was carried out in eight databases between 2000 and 2020 through SR studies referring RRP, LRP, or RARP (80 SR). All references used in these SR were captured referring to 1724 reports. Preoperative and oncological outcomes were compared and correlated among RRP, LRP, and RARP. Evidence Synthesis: Five hundred fifty-nine (32.4%) reports for RRP, 413 (23.9%) for LRP, and 752 (43.7%) for RARP, and a total of 1,353,485 patients were found. Regarding PSM, 284 reports were collected for RRP, 324 for LRP, and 499 for RARP, with rates of 23.6%, 20.7%, and 19.2%, respectively, and only the RRP with statistical difference ( p