Retzius-sparing and conventional robotic prostate surgery are both used to treat prostate cancer. Both are types of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. This means your prostate gland is removed using robotic instruments controlled by the surgeon.
In both methods, the main goal is the same. Your surgeon works to remove the cancer safely while trying to protect urinary and sexual function as much as possible. This is why careful surgical planning is so important in every case.
The main difference is the route used to reach your prostate. In conventional robotic prostate surgery, the prostate is usually approached from the front of the pelvis. In Retzius-sparing surgery, your surgeon approaches from behind and tries to avoid disturbing the space of Retzius.
This difference may help some patients recover urinary control earlier after surgery. Research has often suggested that Retzius-sparing robotic prostatectomy may improve early continence recovery. However, factors such as your cancer location, suitability, surgeon experience, and surgical margin risk still need to be carefully considered before choosing the best approach for you.
What Is Conventional Robotic Prostate Surgery?
Conventional robotic prostate surgery is the more widely used robotic method for removing the prostate. It is often called conventional robot-assisted radical prostatectomy or anterior robotic prostatectomy. This approach is commonly used to treat prostate cancer.
During the operation, your surgeon controls robotic instruments through small cuts in the abdomen. The robotic system provides a magnified view and allows very precise movement inside your pelvis. This can help improve surgical accuracy during the procedure.
Your prostate is removed, and the bladder is then reconnected to the urethra, which carries urine out of the body. In the conventional approach, the surgeon usually reaches the prostate from the front of the pelvis. This means entering the space of Retzius during surgery.
This method is well established and remains suitable for many men with prostate cancer. Surgeons have extensive experience with this approach, and it continues to be widely performed around the world. Treatment planning still depends on your cancer characteristics, anatomy, and overall health when deciding the most appropriate surgical option for you.
What Is Retzius-Sparing Robotic Prostate Surgery?
Retzius-sparing robotic prostate surgery is also a form of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, but the surgical pathway is different. Instead of reaching your prostate from the front of the pelvis, your surgeon approaches it from behind. The operation is still performed using robotic instruments controlled by the surgeon.
The main aim of this approach is to avoid disturbing the space of Retzius. This area contains important support structures linked to the bladder, urethra, and urinary continence mechanism. By preserving these structures, the procedure may help support earlier urinary control recovery after surgery.
A 2023 review described Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy as a posterior approach designed to improve continence recovery after prostate cancer surgery. This is why the technique has gained attention in recent years. However, the approach still requires careful patient selection and surgical expertise.
It is important to understand that Retzius-sparing surgery is not a completely different cancer treatment. Your prostate is still removed as part of prostate cancer surgery. The main difference is simply the surgical route used to perform the operation.
What Is the Space of Retzius?
The space of Retzius is an anatomical area located at the front of your pelvis. It sits behind the pubic bone and in front of your bladder. This space contains tissues that help support the bladder and urethra.
These support structures play an important role in maintaining urinary control. During conventional robotic prostate surgery, this space is usually entered to reach the prostate. As a result, some tissues in this area may be moved, divided, or disturbed during the operation.
Retzius-sparing robotic surgery aims to avoid entering this front pelvic space. By preserving more of these natural support structures, the technique may help support earlier continence recovery after surgery. This is the main principle behind the Retzius-sparing approach.
Difference in Surgical Route
The simplest way to understand the difference is this: conventional robotic prostate surgery approaches your prostate from the front of the pelvis, while Retzius-sparing robotic prostate surgery approaches it from behind. This is the main difference between the two techniques, while the overall goal of treating your cancer remains the same.
In both operations, your prostate is removed using robotic surgical instruments controlled by the surgeon. After the prostate is removed, your bladder and urethra are reconnected, so many parts of the procedure are still very similar.
The main difference is the pathway used during surgery and which tissues are affected to reach the prostate. Conventional surgery usually enters the space of Retzius, while the Retzius-sparing approach tries to avoid it. Because of this difference in surgical route, recovery patterns may vary, particularly in relation to early urinary control after surgery.
Retzius-Sparing vs Conventional Robotic Prostate Surgery
| Feature | Conventional Robotic Prostate Surgery | Retzius-Sparing Robotic Prostate Surgery |
|---|---|---|
| Surgical approach | From the front of the pelvis (anterior approach) | From behind the prostate (posterior approach) |
| Space of Retzius | Entered and dissected during surgery | Avoided or minimally disturbed |
| Main goal | Safe cancer removal with standard technique | Safe cancer removal with tissue preservation focus |
| Bladder support structures | May be disturbed during access | More likely to be preserved |
| Urinary continence recovery | Gradual recovery in many patients | Potentially earlier recovery in selected patients |
| Erectile function impact | Depends mainly on nerve-sparing and patient factors | No clear advantage over conventional approach |
| Cancer control | Well-established long-term outcomes | Effective but requires careful patient selection |
| Positive surgical margin risk | Standard risk profile | May be higher in some anterior tumours (reported in studies) |
| Suitability | Broadly suitable for most patients | Suitable for selected patients only |
| Technical difficulty | Widely performed and standardised | More technically demanding |
| Surgeon experience required | High experience common globally | Requires specific expertise in RS technique |
| Typical use case | Standard choice for most prostate cancers | Selected cases prioritising early continence recovery |
Difference in Pelvic Structure Preservation
One of the main goals of Retzius-sparing surgery is to preserve more of the structures at the front of your pelvis. These structures may include support tissues around the bladder neck, urethra, and continence mechanism.
By working from behind, your surgeon may avoid disturbing some of the natural support framework that helps bladder control. This is why Retzius-sparing surgery is often discussed in relation to earlier continence recovery after surgery.
Conventional robotic surgery can still produce good continence outcomes, especially when performed by an experienced surgeon. The key difference is that Retzius-sparing surgery is specifically designed to preserve the anterior support area as much as possible while still removing the prostate safely.
Difference in Continence Recovery
Urinary continence is one of the biggest concerns after prostate cancer surgery. Once your catheter is removed, you may notice urine leakage when you stand, cough, walk, bend, or lift. This can affect confidence, work, travel, and normal daily life.
Retzius-sparing surgery has gained attention because it may help some men regain urinary control earlier. A 2025 meta-analysis found faster continence recovery with Retzius-sparing robotic prostatectomy compared with conventional robotic surgery. However, it also noted concerns about a higher tendency for positive surgical margins in some patients.
This does not mean every man who has Retzius-sparing surgery will be dry immediately. It means the early recovery pattern may be better for carefully selected patients. The decision still needs to take into account cancer location, surgical safety, and your surgeon’s experience.
Early Continence vs Long-Term Continence
It is important to understand the difference between early continence and long-term continence. Early continence means your bladder control soon after the catheter is removed. This usually refers to the first few weeks or months after surgery.
Long-term continence means urinary control after more healing time has passed. Retzius-sparing surgery seems to have its strongest benefit in early continence recovery. Some studies suggest that long-term continence results may become more similar between the two approaches over time.
This still matters because early urine leakage can be one of the most stressful parts of recovery. If your urinary control returns sooner, you may feel more confident leaving the house, going back to work, and rebuilding your normal daily routines.
Difference in Cancer Control
Cancer control is the most important aim of prostate cancer surgery. A surgical technique is only useful if it can remove your cancer safely. Both Retzius-sparing and conventional robotic surgery can be used, but suitability depends on your individual cancer details.
Your surgeon needs to consider cancer location, stage, grade, MRI findings, biopsy results, and overall surgical judgement. One concern discussed in research is positive surgical margins. This means cancer cells are found at the edge of the removed tissue.
A positive surgical margin does not automatically mean your treatment has failed. However, it may affect PSA follow-up or future treatment decisions. Some evidence suggests Retzius-sparing surgery may have a higher positive margin tendency in certain patients, especially when tumours are located towards the front of the prostate.
This is why patient selection is so important. The continence benefits of Retzius-sparing surgery must always be balanced against safe cancer removal. The right approach should depend on both cancer control and your long-term recovery needs.
Difference in Suitability for Anterior Tumours
Tumour location can affect which surgical approach is more suitable for you. An anterior tumour means the cancer is located towards the front part of the prostate. This detail matters because the surgical route can influence how safely the tumour is removed.
Retzius-sparing surgery approaches your prostate from behind and tries to preserve the front pelvic space. Because of this, anterior tumours may require extra caution. Your surgeon must ensure that preserving these structures does not compromise complete cancer removal.
A study comparing tumour location found that Retzius-sparing robotic prostatectomy had a higher positive surgical margin rate in anterior tumours compared with conventional anterior robotic prostatectomy. This difference was not seen in posterior tumours. This suggests that tumour position can influence the safest surgical choice.
This does not mean Retzius-sparing surgery can never be used for anterior tumours. It means your surgeon should carefully review your MRI, biopsy results, and cancer location before recommending the most appropriate approach for you. The final decision should always balance continence recovery with safe and complete cancer removal.
Difference in Erectile Function
Many men ask whether Retzius-sparing surgery is better for erections. The answer is not as clear as it is for early urinary continence. Erectile recovery after prostate surgery depends on many personal and surgical factors.
These factors can include your age, erections before surgery, diabetes, blood vessel health, cancer location, and recovery time. The possibility of nerve-sparing surgery is also very important. This means erectile outcomes cannot be judged by the surgical route alone.
Retzius-sparing surgery is mainly discussed for helping early urinary continence recovery. It is not a guaranteed method for preserving erections. A major review found no clear significant difference in erectile function preservation between Retzius-sparing and conventional robotic prostatectomy.
If sexual function matters to you, it is important to discuss this clearly with your surgeon before treatment. Ask about nerve-sparing, erectile rehabilitation, and realistic recovery expectations. This can help you understand what may be possible in your individual case.
Difference in Nerve-Sparing
Nerve-sparing can sometimes be performed with either Retzius-sparing or conventional robotic prostate surgery. The nerves involved in erections run very close to the prostate. Whether they can be preserved depends on cancer safety, tumour position, and surgical judgement.
If the cancer is close to the nerves, your surgeon may need to remove tissue more widely. This helps reduce the risk of leaving cancer behind. In this situation, cancer control must come before preserving the nerves.
This decision is not based only on whether the operation is Retzius-sparing or conventional. It depends mainly on your individual cancer. So, you should not assume that one approach automatically protects erections better.
When comparing the two approaches, ask whether nerve-sparing is possible in your case. Your MRI, biopsy results, cancer location, and overall health all matter. This gives you a clearer and more realistic idea of what recovery may look like.
Difference in Recovery Experience
From the outside, recovery after both operations can look quite similar. Both usually involve small abdominal cuts, a short hospital stay depending on local practice, a catheter for a short time, wound care, gentle walking, and activity restrictions.
After either operation, you may feel tired, sore, bloated, and slower than usual. These symptoms are common during the early recovery period. Your body needs time to heal after prostate surgery.
The biggest recovery difference may be urinary control after the catheter is removed. Retzius-sparing surgery may help some men need fewer pads earlier. With conventional surgery, continence recovery may be more gradual for some patients.
However, recovery is still individual. Your age, fitness, bladder function, pelvic floor strength, cancer features, and surgeon’s technique can all affect your progress. This is why your recovery should be discussed based on your own situation, not only the surgical approach.
Difference in Catheter Use
Both approaches usually require a catheter after surgery. The catheter drains urine from the bladder while the join between the bladder and urethra heals. This is a normal and important part of recovery after prostate removal.
Retzius-sparing surgery does not usually mean you avoid a catheter completely. How long it stays in depends on your surgeon’s protocol, your healing, and how secure the join appears. Your surgical team will explain when it can be safely removed.
Once the catheter is removed, your bladder control is assessed. This is when the difference between the two techniques may become more noticeable for some men. Retzius-sparing surgery may help selected patients regain urinary control earlier, but recovery still varies from person to person.
Difference in Return to Work
Return to work depends on your recovery, job type, catheter timing, continence, and energy levels. It is not decided by the name of the operation alone. Everyone heals at a slightly different pace after prostate surgery.
If you do desk-based work, you may return earlier than someone with a physically demanding job. If Retzius-sparing surgery helps you regain urinary control sooner, returning to work may feel easier for some men. This can make daily confidence and routine more manageable.
However, you still need to avoid heavy lifting and strenuous activity until your surgical team says it is safe. Even if the skin cuts are small, important healing is still happening inside the body. This is why return to work should be planned carefully, not rushed.
Difference in Technical Difficulty
Retzius-sparing surgery is generally considered more technically demanding. The surgeon works through a different route and approaches the anatomy from a less conventional angle. This makes surgical experience especially important.
A technique that works well in experienced hands may not be suitable in every centre or for every patient. Conventional robotic prostatectomy is more widely established. It may also be more familiar to many surgeons.
When comparing the two approaches, do not only ask what the technique can do in theory. Ask how experienced your surgeon is with that specific method. The right choice should depend on both your cancer needs and the surgeon’s expertise.
Difference in Surgeon Experience Needed
Surgeon experience matters in both operations. In conventional robotic surgery, experience can affect cancer control, continence recovery, erectile recovery, complication risk, and overall results. This is why the surgeon’s skill is an important part of treatment planning.
For Retzius-sparing surgery, experience may matter even more because the technique is more specialised. The surgeon works through a different route and must judge suitability carefully. A strong result depends not only on the method, but also on how confidently and safely it is performed.
You can ask your surgeon how often they perform Retzius-sparing robotic prostatectomy. You can also ask about their continence rates, positive surgical margin rates, complication rates, and how they choose suitable patients. These questions are fair, useful, and can help you make a more informed decision.
Difference in Positive Surgical Margin Discussion
Positive surgical margins can be discussed after either type of prostate surgery. However, this topic often comes up in Retzius-sparing comparisons. Some studies have raised concerns about margin risk in certain tumour locations.
The key issue is balance. Earlier continence recovery is valuable, but cancer control must remain the main priority. The surgical approach should never compromise safe cancer removal.
If your tumour is in a location where Retzius-sparing may increase margin concern, your surgeon may recommend a conventional approach. This does not mean you are getting an inferior operation. It may simply mean the conventional route is safer for your cancer pattern.
Difference in Patient Selection
Retzius-sparing surgery is usually best viewed as an option for selected patients. You may be more suitable if your cancer location, prostate anatomy, MRI findings, and surgical plan fit the posterior approach. This is why assessment before surgery is so important.
You may be less suitable if the tumour is in a challenging anterior location or if the prostate is very large. Previous pelvic surgery or the need for wider cancer removal may also affect suitability. In these cases, conventional robotic surgery may be a safer option.
Conventional robotic surgery may be suitable for a broader range of prostate cancer cases. Your surgeon should explain which approach fits your cancer and why. Suitability is more important than choosing a technique only because it is popular.
Difference in Daily-Life Impact After Surgery
The daily-life difference may be most noticeable in the first weeks after catheter removal. If Retzius-sparing surgery helps continence return sooner, you may feel more confident walking, going out, returning to work, or attending appointments. This can make early recovery feel less stressful.
You may also use fewer pads sooner and feel less anxious about leakage. With conventional robotic surgery, many men still recover urinary control. However, the early period may involve more pad use or leakage for some patients.
This is not guaranteed with either approach. Every patient’s recovery is different, and continence can depend on many personal and surgical factors. Still, early urinary control is often the main practical difference patients notice after surgery.
Difference in Side Effects
Both operations can have side effects. These may include urinary leakage, erectile dysfunction, dry orgasm, infertility, catheter discomfort, pain, bleeding, infection, wound problems, blood clots, bowel symptoms, and the need for further treatment.
Retzius-sparing surgery may reduce early urinary leakage in suitable patients. However, it does not remove all risks or guarantee a complication-free recovery. You still need careful monitoring and realistic expectations after surgery.
Conventional surgery may be more appropriate for certain cancers, even if early continence recovery is sometimes slower. The right choice depends on which risks matter most in your case. Your surgeon should explain the benefits and limitations of each approach clearly.
Difference in Fertility and Ejaculation
Both operations remove the prostate and seminal vesicles as part of radical prostatectomy. This means you will no longer ejaculate semen after surgery. This change happens with both Retzius-sparing and conventional robotic prostate surgery.
You may still be able to have an orgasm, but it will usually be a dry orgasm. Natural fertility is also affected because semen is no longer produced in the same way. This can be an important issue to discuss before surgery.
If you may want children in the future, sperm storage should be discussed before treatment. Retzius-sparing surgery does not avoid this fertility change because the prostate is still removed. Your surgeon should explain these effects clearly before you make a decision.
Difference in Pelvic Floor Exercise Needs
Pelvic floor exercises may still be recommended after either operation. Even if Retzius-sparing surgery preserves more pelvic support, your urinary control system still needs time to recover. These exercises can help strengthen the muscles involved in bladder control.
Doing the exercises correctly is important. You should ask your specialist nurse, physiotherapist, or surgeon when to start and how to perform them properly. The right guidance can help you avoid mistakes and support your recovery.
Do not assume that a continence-focused surgical approach means pelvic floor exercises are unnecessary. Retzius-sparing surgery may help early continence in some men, but recovery still needs active support. Pelvic floor training can remain an important part of your post-surgery care.
Which Surgery Is Better?
There is no single answer for every patient. Retzius-sparing surgery may be better for selected men when early continence recovery is a major priority. It also depends on whether the cancer is suitable for this approach.
Conventional robotic surgery may be better for men whose cancer location, anatomy, or surgical needs make the anterior approach safer. This does not mean it is a weaker option. It may simply be the more appropriate choice for that patient.
Research suggests Retzius-sparing surgery may improve early continence recovery. However, cancer-control concerns, especially positive margins in certain patients, must be balanced carefully. The better surgery is the one that fits your cancer, anatomy, surgeon’s expertise, and personal priorities.
Why “Newer” Does Not Always Mean Better
It is easy to assume that a newer or more specialised technique is automatically better. However, that is not always true. A specialised approach can offer benefits for the right patient, but it may be less suitable for someone else.
Conventional robotic prostatectomy is widely used and can be highly effective when performed well. Retzius-sparing surgery may offer an early continence advantage in selected men. However, it requires careful patient selection and strong technical skill.
You should not choose surgery based only on the name of the technique. The safer decision comes from balanced advice, your cancer details, your anatomy, and your surgeon’s experience. The best option is the one that fits your individual situation.
When Retzius-Sparing May Be Considered
Retzius-sparing surgery may be considered if your prostate cancer is suitable for surgery. Your surgeon must also feel that the posterior approach can remove the cancer safely. This decision depends on your individual cancer pattern.
It may be especially appealing if early urinary control is one of your biggest concerns. It may also be considered if your surgeon has strong experience with the technique. Tumour location should also be suitable and should not raise extra margin concerns.
However, suitability must be confirmed after reviewing your MRI, biopsy, PSA, prostate size, and overall health. The final decision should be individual, not general. The right approach is the one that balances cancer control, recovery, and long-term safety.
When Conventional Robotic Surgery May Be Preferred
Conventional robotic surgery may be preferred if your cancer location is better approached from the front. It may also be chosen if your surgeon feels it gives safer access for your specific cancer pattern. The main priority is always safe cancer removal.
It may also be preferred when wider cancer clearance, lymph node removal, or nerve-sparing decisions need better access. In some cases, Retzius-sparing surgery may not be available. Your surgeon may also have more experience with the conventional method.
This does not mean you are losing out. A well-performed conventional robotic prostatectomy remains a strong and established treatment for suitable prostate cancer patients. The best choice is the approach that fits your cancer, anatomy, and surgeon’s expertise.
How to Make the Decision
Start with cancer safety. Ask which approach gives the best chance of removing the cancer properly and reducing the risk of leaving cancer behind. This should always come before recovery benefits or the name of the technique.
Then discuss continence recovery, sexual function, recovery time, side effects, and your personal priorities. If early urinary control is very important to you, ask whether Retzius-sparing surgery is suitable for your case. If your surgeon recommends conventional surgery, ask why that route may be safer or more appropriate.
The best decision is not about choosing the most advanced-sounding option. It is about choosing the operation that fits your cancer location, anatomy, surgeon’s experience, recovery needs, and long-term health. Balanced advice can help you feel more confident about the choice.
Speak to Our Specialist
If you are comparing Retzius-sparing and conventional robotic prostate surgery, a specialist consultation can help you understand the difference in your own case. Your situation may depend on your PSA, MRI, biopsy results, tumour location, prostate size, urinary symptoms, erectile function, and general health.
A specialist can explain whether Retzius-sparing surgery is suitable for you. They can also advise whether conventional robotic surgery may be safer or more appropriate. This helps you understand what recovery may realistically look like after treatment.
This kind of consultation can make the decision feel clearer and less overwhelming. Instead of relying on fear or marketing language, you can make a choice based on proper medical advice. The aim is to choose the safest and most suitable approach for your cancer and recovery needs.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
1. What is the main difference between Retzius-sparing and conventional robotic prostate surgery?
The key difference is the surgical approach. Conventional robotic surgery accesses the prostate from the front of the pelvis, while Retzius-sparing surgery approaches it from behind and avoids entering the space of Retzius.
2. Is Retzius-sparing surgery better than conventional robotic prostate surgery?
Not necessarily. Retzius-sparing surgery may offer earlier urinary continence in selected patients, but conventional surgery is more widely applicable and may provide safer cancer control in certain cases. The best option depends on your cancer and anatomy.
3. Which surgery offers faster urinary continence recovery?
Research suggests that Retzius-sparing robotic prostatectomy may lead to faster early urinary continence recovery. However, long-term continence results between the two techniques can become more similar over time.
4. Does Retzius-sparing surgery improve erectile function outcomes?
Current evidence does not show a clear advantage for erectile function recovery with Retzius-sparing surgery compared to conventional robotic prostatectomy. Erectile outcomes mainly depend on nerve-sparing ability, age, baseline function, and cancer location.
5. Is cancer removal equally effective in both procedures?
Both procedures aim to completely remove prostate cancer. However, some studies suggest a slightly higher risk of positive surgical margins in certain tumour locations with Retzius-sparing surgery, making patient selection very important.
6. Who is a good candidate for Retzius-sparing surgery?
You may be suitable if your cancer is localised, your tumour location is favourable (often posterior), and your surgeon believes a safe oncological outcome can be achieved. MRI, biopsy results, and prostate anatomy all play a role in selection.
7. Can Retzius-sparing surgery be used for all prostate cancers?
No. It is not suitable for every patient. Tumours located in the anterior part of the prostate or cases requiring wider surgical clearance may be better managed with conventional robotic prostatectomy.
8. How long does recovery take after each type of surgery?
Initial recovery is similar for both procedures, involving a short hospital stay and catheter use. However, patients undergoing Retzius-sparing surgery may experience earlier improvement in urinary control in some cases.
9. Do both surgeries affect fertility and ejaculation?
Yes. Both Retzius-sparing and conventional robotic prostate surgery remove the prostate and seminal vesicles, which means you will no longer produce semen or ejaculate in the usual way. Orgasm may still be possible but will be dry.
10. How should I decide between the two surgical options?
The decision should be based on cancer safety first, followed by continence, sexual function, and personal preferences. Your surgeon will assess your MRI, biopsy results, prostate size, and overall health to recommend the safest and most suitable option for you.
Final Thoughts: Choosing Between Retzius-Sparing and Conventional Robotic Prostate Surgery
Both Retzius-sparing and conventional robotic prostate surgery are effective treatments for prostate cancer, and neither approach is universally “better” for every patient. The main difference lies in the surgical route, which can influence early urinary continence recovery in some men, while cancer control remains the most important priority in all cases.
Retzius-sparing surgery may offer the benefit of earlier return of urinary control for carefully selected patients, whereas conventional robotic surgery remains a highly established and widely used approach with strong long-term outcomes. The most suitable option depends on your cancer location, anatomy, overall health, and your surgeon’s experience with each technique. If you are considering rretzius-sparing robotic prostate surgery in London, you can get in touch with us for a consultation.
References:
- Li, Y., Zhang, H., Wang, X., Chen, J., Liu, Y. and Zhao, L. (2025) A comparative analysis of the functional outcomes between cancers, 17(24), 3913. Available at: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/17/24/3913
- Chang, Y., Lin, C., Pan, Y. and Wang, P. (2025) Occurrence and impact of intraoperative anastomotic leakage in Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, Medicina, 61(5), 886. Available at: https://www.mdpi.com/1648-9144/61/5/886
- Chen, Y., Wang, J., Li, H., Zhang, L., Liu, X. and Zhao, M. (2023) Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in a medium-sized oncological center holds adequate oncological and functional outcomes, Journal of Clinical Medicine. Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10209308
- Albisinni, S., Aoun, F., Limani, K., Van Velthoven, R. and De Nunzio, C. (2023) Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: functional and oncological outcomes in a large single-centre series, Cancers. Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12009336/
- Asimakopoulos, A.D., Pereira, J., Wilson, C. and Khan, M. (2020) Retzius-sparing versus conventional robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: functional and oncological outcomes, Journal of Clinical Medicine, 9(10). Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31089802/