Comparison of patient-reported outcomes between supraumbilical and transumbilical camera port placement in robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a prospective randomized trial

Ryuta Tanimoto^1,*, Shota Inoue¹, Yuho Sano¹, Satoko Kamada¹, Kenji Sugino¹, Katsumi Sasaki¹, Kasumi Yoshinaga², Yuki Maruyama², Yusuke Tominaga², Satoshi Katayama², Shingo Nishimura², Kensuke Bekku², Takuya Sadahira², Takehiro Iwata², Kohei Edamura², Tomoko Kobayashi², Yasuyuki Kobayashi², Motoo Araki²
1 Department of Urology, Kagawa Prefectural Central Hospital, Takamatsu, Japan
2 Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
* Corresponding Author: Ryuta Tanimoto. Email: email

Canadian Journal of Urology https://doi.org/10.32604/cju.2026.079886

Received 30 January 2026; Accepted 04 June 2026; Published online 14 July 2026

Download PDF

Abstract

Objectives: Supraumbilical (SU) camera ports are typically used during robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy; however, transumbilical (TU) incisions may offer potential cosmetic advantages. This study aimed to compare patient-reported outcomes, including cosmetic outcomes, postoperative pain, and quality of life, between these two approaches. Methods: Between January 2019 and February 2022, 98 patients with localized prostate cancer were randomized to either a SU (n = 50) or TU (n = 48) camera port group, stratified by prostate volume, Gleason score, and age. Body image and cosmetic scale scores, postoperative pain, and health-related quality of life outcomes were prospectively assessed. Results: Baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes were comparable between groups. Body image and cosmetic scale scores did not differ significantly. Pain scores on postoperative day 1 were significantly higher in the TU group (median difference 1 point; TU 3.0 [IQR 2.3–5.0] vs. SU 3.0 [IQR 2.0–4.0]; p = 0.0165), although the absolute difference was modest and did not persist at POD 7. Quality-of-life scores and perioperative complication rates were comparable. Conclusions: This randomized controlled trial suggests that TU camera port placement may not provide a cosmetic advantage and may be associated with increased early postoperative pain compared with a SU approach in robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP).