Robotic-Assisted Prostatectomy

Robotic-assisted prostatectomy in Germany is considered for selected patients with prostate cancer after structured diagnostic evaluation and multidisciplinary review.

Treatment Timeline for Self-Pay Patients in Munich

For self-pay patients travelling to :contentReference[oaicite:0]{index=0} for robotic-assisted prostatectomy, treatment is typically organised according to a structured and time-efficient plan. This approach minimises unnecessary waiting time while allowing thorough medical evaluation and safe surgical preparation.

Day 1: Arrival and Initial Medical Review

Upon arrival, patients attend an in-person consultation with a urology specialist. Medical records, imaging, and biopsy results are reviewed in detail. If required, additional blood tests or imaging studies are arranged to confirm surgical indication and finalise the treatment plan.

Day 2: Preoperative Assessment and Anaesthesia Consultation

Preoperative evaluation includes cardiological assessment, laboratory tests, and consultation with an anaesthesiologist. This day focuses on confirming fitness for surgery and addressing individual medical risks. Final consent and surgical planning are completed.

Day 3: Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

The surgical procedure is performed under general anaesthesia. Postoperatively, patients are monitored in a specialised urology ward with emphasis on pain control, early mobilisation, and clinical stability.

Days 4–6: Postoperative Recovery and Monitoring

During hospital stay, recovery progress is assessed daily. Patients receive guidance on catheter care, mobility, and early rehabilitation. Discharge planning includes detailed instructions and follow-up scheduling.

Day 7 and Beyond: Discharge and Follow-Up Planning

After discharge, patients may remain in Munich briefly or return home with clear medical documentation and follow-up recommendations. Remote follow-up and coordination are arranged as needed.

What Is Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy is a surgical procedure aimed at complete removal of the prostate gland and seminal vesicles in patients diagnosed with prostate cancer. The operation is performed using a robotic surgical system that enhances the surgeon’s precision while maintaining full human control over every surgical movement.

The robotic platform provides magnified three-dimensional visualisation and articulated instruments that allow refined dissection within the confined anatomical space of the pelvis. These technical features support careful separation of the prostate from surrounding tissues, particularly in areas close to structures responsible for urinary continence and erectile function.

In Germany, robotic-assisted prostatectomy is not viewed as an experimental technique or a separate treatment philosophy. It is integrated into standard urological practice in high-volume centres, following national and international clinical guidelines. The choice of robotic surgery is based on clinical indication rather than technological preference.

It is essential to understand that robotic assistance does not replace surgical expertise. Outcomes depend primarily on surgeon experience, case selection, and adherence to oncological principles rather than the presence of robotic equipment alone.

Clinical Purpose of Radical Prostatectomy

The primary goal of radical prostatectomy is long-term oncological control through complete removal of malignant tissue. Surgery also provides definitive pathological staging, which helps guide postoperative management and long-term surveillance.

Radical prostatectomy may be performed with curative intent in patients whose cancer is confined to the prostate or has limited local extension. In some cases, surgery forms part of a multimodal treatment strategy, combined with radiotherapy or systemic therapy based on postoperative findings.

Unlike focal therapies or active surveillance, radical prostatectomy removes the entire prostate gland. This approach offers the advantage of eliminating multifocal disease that may not be fully captured by biopsy or imaging.

Prostate Cancer Stages and Surgical Decision-Making

The decision to recommend robotic-assisted prostatectomy is closely linked to the clinical stage of prostate cancer. Staging reflects tumour extent, lymph node involvement, and the presence or absence of distant metastases.

Patients with clinically localised prostate cancer are often considered suitable candidates for surgery. This includes tumours confined to the prostate gland or showing minimal extension beyond the capsule without evidence of metastatic spread.

In selected cases of locally advanced disease, surgery may still be considered, particularly when complete resection appears feasible and when postoperative therapies can be applied if necessary. Conversely, metastatic prostate cancer is generally managed with systemic treatments rather than surgery.

German urology centres emphasise careful staging using modern imaging techniques to avoid unnecessary surgery in patients unlikely to benefit from prostate removal.

Indications for Robotic-Assisted Prostatectomy

Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy is typically proposed when diagnostic findings indicate a reasonable balance between oncological benefit and functional risk. Indications are evaluated individually rather than applied uniformly.

• Clinically localised prostate cancer with curative treatment intent
• Intermediate-risk tumours where surgical staging is beneficial
• Selected high-risk cases suitable for combined treatment strategies
• Patients with sufficient life expectancy to benefit from surgery

Functional considerations, such as baseline urinary control and sexual function, are incorporated into preoperative counselling. These factors influence surgical planning and patient expectations.

When Surgery May Not Be Recommended

Not every patient diagnosed with prostate cancer benefits from radical prostatectomy. In some situations, alternative management strategies may offer similar survival outcomes with different side-effect profiles.

Robotic-assisted surgery may not be recommended in patients with advanced metastatic disease, significant comorbidities, or very low-risk tumours suitable for active surveillance.

• Distant metastatic spread confirmed on imaging
• Severe cardiovascular or pulmonary disease limiting surgical tolerance
• Low-risk prostate cancer appropriate for surveillance protocols
• Complex pelvic anatomy due to prior surgery or radiotherapy

German clinical practice relies on multidisciplinary tumour boards to evaluate such cases and avoid overtreatment.

Diagnostic Assessment Before Robotic-Assisted Prostatectomy

Accurate diagnostic assessment is the cornerstone of decision-making before robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. In Germany, surgery is not recommended based on a single test result or biopsy alone. Instead, a structured diagnostic pathway is used to confirm tumour characteristics, estimate surgical risks, and evaluate potential functional outcomes.

The diagnostic process aims to answer several key clinical questions. These include whether the cancer is confined to the prostate, how aggressive the tumour appears, whether lymph nodes may be involved, and whether surgical removal offers a realistic chance of long-term disease control.

This systematic approach reduces the risk of overtreatment and helps avoid surgery in patients unlikely to benefit from prostate removal.

Role of Multiparametric MRI in Surgical Planning

Multiparametric MRI of the prostate plays a central role in preoperative evaluation. This imaging technique combines anatomical and functional sequences to assess tumour location, size, and potential extension beyond the prostate capsule.

In the context of robotic-assisted prostatectomy, mpMRI helps surgeons anticipate anatomical challenges and plan nerve-sparing strategies when oncologically appropriate. It also contributes to more accurate risk stratification when combined with biopsy findings.

German centres routinely use mpMRI to guide both biopsy decisions and surgical planning, particularly in patients with intermediate or high-risk disease.

• Assessment of tumour location within the prostate
• Evaluation of extracapsular extension risk
• Identification of areas close to neurovascular bundles
• Improved correlation with targeted biopsy results

While mpMRI improves diagnostic accuracy, it does not replace histological confirmation. Imaging findings must always be interpreted alongside biopsy results.

Prostate Biopsy and Histopathological Evaluation

Histopathological confirmation of prostate cancer is essential before any surgical intervention. Biopsy samples provide information on tumour grade, distribution, and aggressiveness, which directly influence treatment recommendations.

In Germany, biopsy results are often reviewed by specialised genitourinary pathologists, particularly when surgery is being considered. Second-opinion pathology may be requested to ensure accurate grading.

The Gleason grading system and its modern ISUP classification are used to categorise tumour aggressiveness. These classifications help estimate the likelihood of disease progression and guide decisions regarding surgery versus alternative treatments.

• Systematic biopsy for overall gland assessment
• Targeted biopsy of MRI-visible lesions
• Correlation of histology with imaging findings
• Risk stratification based on tumour grade

Accurate pathological evaluation is particularly important when considering nerve-sparing approaches, as higher-grade tumours may require wider resection margins.

Understanding Gleason Score and ISUP Grade

The Gleason score reflects the microscopic appearance of prostate cancer cells and serves as a key indicator of tumour behaviour. It is derived from the two most prevalent growth patterns observed in biopsy samples.

The ISUP grading system groups Gleason scores into clinically meaningful categories, making risk assessment more intuitive for treatment planning.

Lower-grade tumours may be suitable for nerve-sparing surgery or even non-surgical management, while higher-grade cancers often require more extensive resection and closer postoperative surveillance.

German surgeons integrate Gleason and ISUP grading into preoperative counselling to align surgical planning with oncological safety.

Patient Selection and Risk Stratification

Robotic-assisted prostatectomy is offered only after careful patient selection. This process balances oncological benefit against potential functional consequences.

Risk stratification considers multiple factors rather than relying on a single parameter. Age, general health, baseline urinary control, and sexual function are all relevant when discussing surgical options.

• Clinical stage based on imaging
• PSA level and kinetics
• Biopsy grade and tumour volume
• Overall health and comorbidities

This comprehensive assessment helps ensure that surgery is proposed when the expected benefits outweigh the risks.

Nerve-Sparing Technique: Indications and Limitations

Nerve-sparing is a surgical technique aimed at preserving the neurovascular bundles adjacent to the prostate. These structures play a key role in erectile function and contribute to urinary control.

In robotic-assisted prostatectomy, enhanced visualisation supports precise dissection near these delicate structures. However, nerve-sparing is not always oncologically appropriate.

The decision to preserve nerves depends on tumour location, grade, and risk of extracapsular extension. Preserving nerves in the presence of high-risk disease may compromise cancer control.

• Favourable tumour location away from neurovascular bundles
• Low to intermediate tumour grade
• No imaging evidence of extracapsular extension
• Patient preference after informed counselling

German surgeons prioritise oncological safety over functional preservation when these goals conflict.

Planning Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection

Pelvic lymph node dissection may be performed during robotic-assisted prostatectomy in patients with an increased risk of nodal involvement. This decision is guided by validated risk models and imaging findings.

Lymph node removal provides important staging information and may influence postoperative treatment decisions. It is not routinely performed in low-risk cases.

Robotic-assisted techniques allow systematic lymph node dissection while maintaining visual control of surrounding structures.

Comparison of Diagnostic Tools Used Before Surgery

No single diagnostic method is sufficient on its own. Surgical planning relies on integration of all available data.

Multidisciplinary Tumour Board Review

In Germany, treatment decisions for prostate cancer are commonly discussed in multidisciplinary tumour boards. These meetings involve urologists, radiologists, oncologists, pathologists, and radiation specialists.

The tumour board evaluates diagnostic findings and recommends an individualised treatment strategy. This process reduces bias toward a single treatment modality and ensures that surgery is proposed only when clinically justified.

For patients considering robotic-assisted prostatectomy, tumour board review adds an additional layer of quality control and transparency.

How Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy Is Performed

Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy is performed under general anaesthesia. After induction of anaesthesia, several small abdominal incisions are created to introduce robotic instruments and a high-definition camera. Carbon dioxide insufflation is used to create a working space within the abdominal cavity.

The surgeon operates from a console, controlling each instrument movement in real time. The robotic system translates hand movements into precise actions with reduced tremor and enhanced range of motion. This setup allows detailed dissection in anatomically confined areas of the pelvis.

The prostate gland is separated from surrounding tissues, including the bladder neck and urethra. When oncologically appropriate, nerve-sparing techniques are applied to preserve structures involved in urinary continence and erectile function. The prostate and seminal vesicles are then removed as a single specimen.

If indicated, pelvic lymph node dissection is performed during the same procedure. The bladder is subsequently reconnected to the urethra, and a urinary catheter is placed to support healing.

Duration of Surgery and Hospital Stay

The duration of robotic-assisted prostatectomy varies depending on anatomical complexity, tumour characteristics, and whether lymph node dissection is required. Surgery typically lasts several hours.

Postoperative hospital stay in Germany usually ranges from several days, allowing for early mobilisation, monitoring of recovery, and management of pain or early complications. Enhanced recovery protocols are commonly applied.

Patients are encouraged to begin gentle movement soon after surgery to reduce the risk of thromboembolic complications and support overall recovery.

Potential Surgical Risks and Complications

Robotic-assisted prostatectomy carries risks inherent to major pelvic surgery. While robotic techniques aim to improve precision, they do not eliminate the possibility of complications.

Complications may occur during surgery or in the postoperative period. Their likelihood depends on patient-specific factors, tumour extent, and surgical complexity.

• Bleeding requiring transfusion
• Infection at surgical sites or urinary tract
• Injury to surrounding organs such as bladder or bowel
• Anastomotic leakage at the bladder-urethra connection
• Venous thromboembolism

German centres apply structured perioperative safety protocols and postoperative monitoring to minimise these risks.

Urinary Incontinence After Prostatectomy

Urinary incontinence is one of the most significant concerns for patients considering radical prostatectomy. Temporary loss of urinary control is common after surgery and usually improves over time.

Continence recovery depends on several factors, including patient age, baseline urinary function, surgical technique, and adherence to pelvic floor rehabilitation.

Most patients experience gradual improvement within months following surgery. Persistent incontinence may occur in a smaller proportion of cases and can be managed with targeted therapies.

• Early postoperative leakage during physical activity
• Gradual improvement with pelvic floor training
• Individual variability in recovery timeline

German rehabilitation protocols emphasise early pelvic floor physiotherapy and structured follow-up.

Erectile Function and Sexual Health

Erectile dysfunction is a potential consequence of radical prostatectomy due to the proximity of neurovascular bundles responsible for erection. Preservation of these structures depends on tumour location and oncological safety.

Nerve-sparing techniques may improve the likelihood of erectile function recovery in selected patients. However, recovery is not immediate and may take many months.

Age, baseline erectile function, and comorbidities significantly influence outcomes. Even with nerve preservation, full recovery cannot be guaranteed.

Postoperative sexual rehabilitation may include pharmacological support or specialised therapy as part of comprehensive care.

Postoperative Recovery and Rehabilitation

Recovery after robotic-assisted prostatectomy continues beyond hospital discharge. The urinary catheter is typically removed after a defined healing period, depending on surgical findings.

Patients receive guidance on activity restrictions, wound care, and gradual return to daily activities. Heavy lifting and strenuous exercise are generally limited during early recovery.

Pelvic floor rehabilitation plays a central role in continence recovery. Programmes are tailored to individual needs and supervised by trained specialists.

Follow-Up After Surgery

Long-term follow-up after radical prostatectomy focuses on oncological surveillance and functional recovery. PSA monitoring is used to assess treatment effectiveness.

Regular follow-up appointments allow early detection of biochemical recurrence and timely initiation of additional therapies if required.

Functional outcomes, including urinary and sexual health, are addressed during follow-up to optimise quality of life.

Common Patient Misconceptions About Robotic Surgery

Patients considering robotic-assisted prostatectomy often hold misconceptions that can influence expectations and decision-making.

One common misunderstanding is that robotic surgery guarantees better outcomes. In reality, surgical success depends on appropriate patient selection and surgeon experience rather than technology alone.

Another misconception is that robotic surgery eliminates the risk of incontinence or erectile dysfunction. While certain risks may be reduced in selected cases, they cannot be completely avoided.

• Robotic systems do not operate independently
• Functional outcomes vary between individuals
• Technology does not replace clinical judgement

Clear preoperative counselling is essential to align expectations with realistic outcomes.

Typical Errors in Patient Decision-Making

Some patients choose surgical treatment without fully understanding alternative options or potential consequences. Decisions driven by anxiety or incomplete information may lead to regret.

Common errors include focusing solely on technology, underestimating recovery demands, or overlooking the importance of diagnostic accuracy.

German clinical practice emphasises informed decision-making supported by comprehensive diagnostic evaluation and multidisciplinary input.

Oncological Outcomes After Radical Prostatectomy

The primary objective of radical prostatectomy is durable oncological control. Surgical removal of the prostate allows complete excision of visible tumour tissue and provides definitive pathological staging. This information is essential for assessing long-term prognosis and determining whether additional treatment may be required.

Postoperative pathology evaluates tumour grade, surgical margins, extracapsular extension, and lymph node involvement. These findings refine risk assessment beyond preoperative estimates and guide follow-up strategy.

In patients with organ-confined disease and favourable pathological features, long-term disease control is commonly achieved with surgery alone. In cases where adverse features are identified, adjuvant or salvage treatments may be recommended to reduce recurrence risk.

Long-term monitoring focuses on prostate-specific antigen levels. A sustained undetectable PSA following surgery is considered a marker of effective local disease control, while rising values may prompt further evaluation.

What Radical Prostatectomy Can and Cannot Achieve

Radical prostatectomy is an established curative treatment option for selected patients with prostate cancer. However, it is important to understand its limitations.

Surgery removes the prostate gland and provides accurate staging, but it does not eliminate the biological variability of prostate cancer. Some tumours behave aggressively despite early intervention, while others remain indolent.

Functional outcomes cannot be fully predicted before surgery. Even with meticulous technique, urinary and sexual function recovery varies between individuals. German clinical counselling emphasises realistic expectations rather than technological optimism.

Long-Term Quality of Life Considerations

Quality of life after robotic-assisted prostatectomy is influenced by oncological outcomes, functional recovery, and psychological adaptation. Many patients resume normal daily activities and maintain independence following recovery.

Ongoing support, rehabilitation, and follow-up contribute to long-term well-being. Addressing urinary control, sexual health, and emotional concerns is considered part of comprehensive cancer care.

German urology centres integrate follow-up care into structured survivorship pathways to support patients beyond the immediate postoperative period.

Cost of Robotic-Assisted Prostatectomy in Germany

The cost of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy in Germany varies 11.000-19.000 € depending on clinical complexity, diagnostic requirements, hospital stay, and postoperative care. Pricing reflects the comprehensive nature of treatment rather than the surgical act alone.

Cost calculations typically include preoperative diagnostics, surgery, anaesthesia, hospitalisation, pathology analysis, and standard postoperative monitoring. Additional therapies, if required, are assessed separately.

A personalised cost estimate is prepared after review of medical documentation, ensuring transparency and alignment with the proposed treatment plan.

Factors Influencing Treatment Costs

Several factors influence the overall cost of surgical treatment. These variables are assessed individually during treatment planning.

• Extent of diagnostic evaluation required
• Need for lymph node dissection
• Length of hospital stay
• Postoperative rehabilitation requirements
• Additional oncological therapies if indicated

German medical billing follows defined frameworks, supporting clear cost structures and documentation.

Why Consider Robotic Prostate Surgery in Germany

Germany is recognised for its structured healthcare system, evidence-based clinical guidelines, and emphasis on quality assurance. Robotic-assisted prostatectomy is integrated into established urological care pathways rather than positioned as a standalone innovation.

High surgical volumes, multidisciplinary tumour boards, and systematic outcome monitoring contribute to consistent standards of care. Treatment recommendations are guided by clinical indication rather than procedural preference.

German centres prioritise diagnostic accuracy, appropriate patient selection, and transparent counselling, supporting informed decision-making.

Role of Independent Medical Coordination

Navigating complex medical decisions can be challenging, particularly when evaluating multiple treatment options. Independent coordination supports clarity by organising medical records, facilitating expert review, and presenting structured information.

Coordination does not replace medical decision-making. Instead, it ensures that relevant specialists have access to complete and accurate information when providing recommendations.

Follow-Up, PSA Monitoring, and Recurrence Management

Follow-up after radical prostatectomy is an essential component of long-term prostate cancer management. Surgical treatment does not conclude care but marks the beginning of structured oncological surveillance aimed at early detection of recurrence and support of functional recovery.

The cornerstone of postoperative monitoring is regular measurement of prostate-specific antigen. Following complete removal of the prostate gland, PSA levels are expected to fall to undetectable values. Persistent or rising PSA during follow-up may indicate residual or recurrent disease and requires further evaluation.

German clinical practice applies clearly defined follow-up intervals, particularly during the first years after surgery. PSA testing is typically performed at regular intervals, with frequency adjusted according to pathological findings and individual risk factors. This approach allows timely identification of biochemical recurrence before clinical symptoms develop.

Biochemical recurrence does not automatically imply clinical progression or immediate need for additional treatment. In many cases, further assessment is required to determine the source and extent of recurrence. Imaging studies and risk evaluation guide subsequent management decisions.

Management options after biochemical recurrence depend on postoperative pathology, PSA kinetics, and patient-specific factors. Salvage radiotherapy, systemic therapy, or continued observation may be considered based on multidisciplinary evaluation. Early detection through structured follow-up expands the range of effective treatment options.

Functional recovery is also addressed during follow-up visits. Urinary continence, sexual health, and overall quality of life are assessed alongside oncological parameters. Adjustments to rehabilitation strategies or supportive therapies are made as needed.

German urology centres integrate follow-up into comprehensive survivorship care pathways. These pathways emphasise continuity, coordination between specialties, and patient education, supporting long-term disease control and adaptation after prostate cancer treatment.

Robotic Surgery vs Radiotherapy: Clinical Decision Logic

Choosing between radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy is a common clinical dilemma for patients with localised or locally advanced prostate cancer. Both approaches are established treatments with distinct advantages and limitations.

Surgery offers complete removal of the prostate gland and provides definitive pathological information. This allows precise assessment of tumour extent, margin status, and lymph node involvement. In contrast, radiotherapy treats the prostate in situ and relies on imaging and biopsy for staging.

Robotic-assisted prostatectomy is often favoured in patients who are fit for surgery and wish to obtain definitive pathological staging. It may also simplify subsequent salvage treatments if recurrence occurs. Radiotherapy, on the other hand, may be preferred in patients with higher surgical risk or those wishing to avoid operative intervention.

Functional outcomes differ between modalities. Surgery carries a risk of urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction, particularly in the early postoperative period. Radiotherapy may have delayed urinary, bowel, or sexual side effects that develop gradually over time.

German clinical practice emphasises shared decision-making supported by multidisciplinary tumour board discussion. Treatment choice is guided by tumour characteristics, patient preferences, functional considerations, and long-term risk profiles rather than perceived technological superiority.

Long-Term Functional Adaptation After Prostatectomy

Functional recovery after radical prostatectomy extends beyond the immediate postoperative period. Adaptation continues over months and years as patients adjust to changes in urinary and sexual function.

Urinary continence typically improves gradually within the first year after surgery, although timelines vary. Pelvic floor rehabilitation and consistent follow-up support recovery. Some patients require additional interventions to address persistent symptoms.

Erectile function recovery may continue for up to several years, particularly in patients who undergo nerve-sparing surgery and engage in structured sexual rehabilitation. Age, baseline function, and comorbidities strongly influence long-term outcomes.

Psychological adaptation is an important aspect of recovery. Patients may experience anxiety related to cancer surveillance or functional changes. German survivorship care integrates medical follow-up with supportive counselling when needed.

Long-term quality of life is shaped by a combination of oncological control, functional outcomes, and individual coping strategies. Ongoing medical support helps patients adjust expectations and maintain independence.

Second Opinion Before Prostate Surgery: Why It Matters

Seeking a second medical opinion before radical prostatectomy is an important step for many patients facing prostate cancer treatment decisions. Surgery is irreversible, and treatment choice has long-term implications for both oncological outcomes and quality of life.

A second opinion allows independent review of diagnostic findings, including imaging, biopsy results, and PSA dynamics. Differences in interpretation may influence whether surgery is recommended immediately, postponed, or replaced by an alternative approach such as radiotherapy or active surveillance.

In German clinical practice, second opinions are commonly integrated into routine care, particularly in cases with borderline indications or conflicting diagnostic signals. Independent assessment helps confirm tumour stage, evaluate surgical margins risk, and reassess nerve-sparing feasibility.

For some patients, a second opinion reinforces the original recommendation and provides reassurance. For others, it may reveal additional options or suggest a different treatment sequence. Both outcomes support informed decision-making.

Second-opinion review is not intended to delay necessary treatment. Instead, it aims to reduce uncertainty, align expectations with realistic outcomes, and ensure that surgery is chosen for clear medical reasons rather than urgency or incomplete information.

Typical Clinical Decision Pathways in German Practice

Clinical decision-making in German urology centres follows structured pathways designed to align treatment choice with individual risk and patient goals.

In patients with low-risk disease, active surveillance is commonly recommended, with surgery reserved for evidence of progression or patient preference after counselling.

Intermediate-risk patients are often considered optimal candidates for robotic-assisted prostatectomy. Surgery provides both therapeutic benefit and accurate staging, supporting long-term management.

High-risk patients undergo detailed multidisciplinary evaluation. Radical prostatectomy may be offered as part of a multimodal strategy, followed by tailored postoperative treatment if necessary.

These pathways are not rigid algorithms but frameworks that support consistent, evidence-based decision-making. Individual patient factors remain central to final recommendations.

How Kliniki.de Supports the Treatment Process

Kliniki.de assists patients in organising medical evaluations and treatment planning within the German healthcare system. Support focuses on medical clarity, structured communication, and coordination with appropriate specialists.

Services include review of medical documentation, facilitation of expert opinions, and assistance with logistical planning. The aim is to support informed decisions rather than promote a specific treatment.

Patients retain full autonomy in choosing whether and how to proceed after receiving expert input.

da Vinci Surgical Systemprostate cancer treatment