1. All the truth about local treatment options T1-2: surgery Vincenzo Ficarra Department of Oncological and Surgical Sciences Urologic Unit, University of Padova, Italy

2. Radical Prostatectomy History 1904 1983 1992 2000 Non-anatomic Radical Prostatectomy (Young, 1904) Anatomic Retropubic Radical Prostatectomy (Walsh, 1983) Magnified Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy (Schuessler, 1992) Millimetric Robotic Radical Prostatectomy (Binder, 2000)

3. Use of Minimally Invasive vs Open RP SEER registries: 2003-2007 Hu JC. et al. JAMA 2009; 302: 1557-1564

4. 130 citations (2009-2011)

5. MEDLINE [4,000 records] EMBASE [2,265 records] Web Science [4,219 records] 37 comparative studies non comparative studies Abstracts and reports from meeting of comparative studies Evidence acquisition: 1999-2008 Three Authors separately reviewed the records Studies cited in the references list

8. Update of the systematic review Novara G, Ficarra V, Montorsi F. et al. (Unpublished data)

9. Update of the systematic review 37 comparative studies RRP Vs LRP (n = 23) RRP Vs RALP (n = 10) LRP Vs RALP (n = 4) RRP Vs LRP (n = 1) RRP Vs RALP (n = 16) LRP Vs RALP (n = 4) 21 comparative studies

11. Perioperative data: non comparative RALP series Ficarra V. et al. AUA Update series – Lesson 30; 2010

12. Blood loss: RALP Vs RRP Novara G, Ficarra V., Montorsi F. et al (unpuplished data) Most of the comparative studies reported data in a format not suitable for cumulative analysis (median values)

13. Transfusion rate: RRP Vs RALP Novara G, Ficarra V., Montorsi F. et al (unpuplished data)

14. Overall complications: RRP Vs RALP Novara G, Ficarra V., Montorsi F. et al (unpuplished data)

15. Overall complication rate: RRP Vs RALP Carlsson S. et al. Urology 2010; 75: 1092-1099

17. Urinary continence recovery Myers R. J Urol 1987; 138 (3): 543-50

18. Urinary continence recovery: non comparative RALP series Ficarra V. et al. AUA Update series – Lesson 30; 2010

19. Urinary continence: RALP Vs RRP Tewari et al BJU Inter 2003; 92: 205-210. RALP RRP

20. Urinary continence: RALP Vs RRP Novara G, Ficarra V., Montorsi F. et al (unpuplished data) 6-mo continence rate

21. Urinary continence: RALP Vs RRP Novara G, Ficarra V., Montorsi F. et al (unpuplished data) 12-mo continence rate

22. Nerve-sparing techniques and Potency recovery Stolzenburg JU et al, Eur Urol 2007;51(3):629-39 Interfascial Intrafascial

23. Potency recovery: non comparative RALP series Ficarra V. et al. AUA Update series – Lesson 30; 2010

24. Potency recovery: RALP Vs RRP Tewari et al BJU Inter 2003; 92: 205-210. RALP RRP

25. Potency recovery: RALP Vs RRP Novara G, Ficarra V., Montorsi F. et al (unpuplished data)

27. Positive Surgical Margin rates after RALP Ficarra V. et al. AUA Update series – Lesson 30; 2010

28. Positive surgical margins: RALP Vs RRP Novara G, Ficarra V., Montorsi F. et al (unpuplished data)

29. Positive surgical margins: RALP Vs RRP Novara G, Ficarra V., Montorsi F. et al (unpuplished data) Sensitivity analysis in prospective studies

30. Positive surgical margins: RALP Vs RRP Novara G, Ficarra V., Montorsi F. et al (unpuplished data) Sensitivity analysis in pT2 prostate cancers

31. Oncological Results: 5-year bDFS Menon M et al Eur Urol 2010; 58: 838-846 95% 91% 86% 81%

32. Oncological Results: 5-year bDFS Mottrie A et al (submitted to BJU Inter) 81%

33. Oncological Results: 3-year bDFS Schroeck FR et al BJU Inter 2008; 102: 28-32

34. Oncological Results: 3-year bDFS Barocas DA et al J Urol 2010; 183: 990-996

35. Oncological Results: 5-year bDFS Drouin SJ et al World J Urol 2009; 27: 599-605

36. Potential disadvantages of minimally invasive radical prostatectomy: Costs Bolenz C. et al. Eur Urol 2010; 57: 453-458