https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2026.15585
Oncological and perioperative outcomes following salvage robotic radical prostatectomy after radiation versus focal therapy: a multicenter analysis of 441 patients
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Published: 31 July 2026
Background: Salvage robotic radical prostatectomy (sRRP) represents a definitive local treatment option for recurrent prostate cancer following nonsurgical primary therapy. However, the impact of prior treatment modality on oncological outcomes and perioperative morbidity remains incompletely defined.
Objective: To evaluate oncological outcomes and perioperative complications following sRRP and to assess the influence of prior radiation therapy (RT) versus focal therapy (FT) using a multicenter retrospective cohort.
Design: We conducted a multicenter retrospective analysis of 441 patients who underwent salvage robotic radical prostatectomy (sRRP) after prior radiation therapy or focal therapy across participating institutions to reflect real-world clinical scenarios. Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Primary outcome was recurrence-free survival (RFS). Secondary outcomes included cancer-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), and 90-day postoperative complications. Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariable Cox regression were used for survival outcomes, while logistic regression was used to identify predictors of complications.
Results: Patients in the RT group exhibited more adverse baseline pathological features, including higher rates of advanced stage and nodal disease. FT was associated with improved RFS, with early and sustained separation of survival curves. In contrast, CSS and OS were comparable between groups. On multivariable analysis, node-positive disease was the strongest predictor of adverse oncological outcomes, while treatment modality was not independently associated with CSS or OS. The overall complication rate was 27%, with significantly higher rates observed in the RT group compared to FT (31% vs 18%, p = 0.004). Prior RT was identified as the strongest independent predictor of postoperative morbidity.
Conclusions: Prior treatment modality influences recurrence patterns and perioperative morbidity following sRRP, while long-term survival outcomes are primarily driven by tumor biology. FT may offer a more favorable perioperative profile, whereas RT is associated with increased surgical complexity and complications
Downloads
1. Kania E, Janica M, Nesterowicz M, et al. Advances and Challenges in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: A Comprehensive Review. Cancers (Basel). 2025; 17:2137. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17132137
2. Rawla P. Epidemiology of prostate cancer. World J Oncol. 2019; 10:63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14740/wjon1191
3. Drobner J, Kaldany A, Shah MS, Ghodoussipour S. The role of salvage radical prostatectomy in patients with radiation-resistant prostate cancer. Cancers. 2023; 15:3734. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15143734
4. Al-Ogaili M, Venkatesh A, Dham J, et al. The impact of internal iliac artery clamping on blood loss, functional outcomes, and cancer control during robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Robot Surg. 2025; 19:735. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-025-02923-z
5. Hayashi S, Hayashi K, Yoshimura RI, et al. Salvage radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy: outcomes and prognostic factors especially focusing on pathological findings. J Radiat Res. 2012; 53:727-34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jrr/rrs034
6. Antunac K. Radiotherapy of prostate cancer: primary radiotherapy and radiotherapy in disease relapse. Acta Clinica Croatica. 2019; 58(Suppl 2):46.
7. Basseri S, Perlis N, Ghai S. Focal therapy for prostate cancer. Abdom Radiol. 2025; 50:757-69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-024-04482-7
8. Storino Ramacciotti L, Abreu AL, Crouzet S, et al. Salvage treatments after focal therapy for prostate cancer-a comprehensive review. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2025;28:557-71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-024-00875-3
9. Blank F, Meyer M, Wang H, et al. Salvage radical prostatectomy after primary focal ablative therapy: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Cancers. 2023; 15:2727. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15102727
10. Ghoreifi A, Ramacciotti LS, Kaneko M, et al. The outcomes of salvage robotic radical prostatectomy following radiation versus focal therapy: Does the primary treatment modality matter?. BJUI compass. 2025; 6:e70019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bco2.70019
11. Mundra V, Titus RS, Luna E, et al. Morbidity and mortality of salvage radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: An analysis of the National surgical quality improvement program targeted prostatectomy database. In Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations. Elsevier. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2024.12.010
12. Stephenson AJ, Scardino PT, Bianco FJ, et al. Morbidity and functional outcomes of salvage radical prostatectomy for locally recurrent prostate cancer after radiation therapy. J Urol. 2004; 172:2239-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000140960.63108.39
13. Ogaya-Pinies G, Linares-Espinos E, Hernandez-Cardona E, et al. Salvage robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: oncologic and functional outcomes from two high-volume institutions. World J Urol. 2019; 37:1499-505. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2406-4
14. Nunes-Silva I, Barret E, Srougi V, et al. Effect of prior focal therapy on perioperative, oncologic and functional outcomes of salvage robotic assisted radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2017; 198:1069-76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.05.071
15. Wenzel M, Nathan A, Covas Moschovas M, et al. Oncological Outcomes After Robotic Salvage Radical Prostatectomy in Patients Primarily Treated With Focal Versus Radiation Therapy: A Junior ERUS/YAU Collaborative Study. Prostate. 2025; 85:1332-41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.70020
16. Bates AS, Samavedi S, Kumar A, et al. Salvage robot assisted radical prostatectomy: A propensity matched study of perioperative, oncological and functional outcomes. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2015;41:1540-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2015.06.002
17. Moschovas MC, Bravi CA, Dell'Oglio P, et al. Outcomes of Salvage Robotic-assisted Radical Prostatectomy in the last decade: systematic review and perspectives of referral centers. International Braz J Urol. 2023; 49:677-87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2023.0467
18. Moschovas MC, Saikali S, Sandri M, et al. Outcomes of salvage robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: high-volume multicentric data from the European Association of Urology Robotic Urology Section Scientific Working Group. Eur Urol. 2025; 88:103-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2025.03.009
19. Cella L, Fasulo V, Moretto S, et al. Salvage robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy after targeted high-intensity focused ultrasound: a single-center study on feasibility, oncological and functional outcomes. Frontiers Oncol. 2026; 16:1711853. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2026.1711853
Ethics Approval
CRediT authorship contribution
Ahmed Rabie: Conceptualization, Data collection, Data analysis, Writing – original draft.; Mahmoud Khalil: Critical revision, Supervision; Maurizio Buscarini: Methodology, Critical revision, Supervision; Moustafa Elsawy: Critical revision, Supervision; Maida Bada: Methodology, Critical revision, Supervision; Rocco Papalia: Supervision, Data analysis: Zachary Dovey :Critical revision, Supervision; , Rocco Papalia: Critical revision, Supervision; Alberto Martini: Critical revision, Supervision; Massimiliano Di Marco: Methodology, Critical revision, Supervision; Brooke Hildebrand: Critical revision, Supervision; Tommas Angelo Petitti: Methodology, Critical revision, Supervision. Osama Zaytoun: Methodology, Critical revision, Supervision
Supporting Agencies
Data Availability Statement
All data can be made available by the corresponding author upon reasonable request
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
PAGEPress has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.