I sometimes offer the opinion that robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) for a straightforward surgical case offers no substantial benefit compared to the open operation in the hands of an experienced and skilled surgeon. The point is rather moot nowadays since experienced open radical prostatectomy surgeons are disappearing. However, almost everything which increases complexity of the proceduredpatient obesity, prior radiation, previous inguinal hernia surgery with mesh, a small volume prostate, to name a fewdenhances the advantages of the robotic approach. This also applies to prior prostate surgery such as transurethral resection (TURP). With open surgery, the thin anterior prostate is easily disrupted, the junction with the trigone may be difficult to distinguish, and the small volume may make prostate borders indistinct. Some of these issues apply with RALP but are less of a factor.In this issue of The Journal, Leyh-Bannurah et al (page 308) from Germany evaluated over 5,000 patients who underwent RALP and compared those without prior prostate surgery to a group who had previous TURP or laser enucleation (LE-P). 1 No difference in complications was observed and oncologic outcomes including margin status and biochemical recurrence rates were similar. Both continence and potency results, though, were statistically inferior in the TURP/LE-P patients.