Since robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) started to be regularly performed in 2001, the procedure has typically followed the original retropubic approach, with incremental technical improvements in an attempt to improve outcomes. These include the running Van-Velthoven anastomosis, posterior reconstruction or 'Rocco stitch' [1], and cold ligation of the Santorini plexus/dorsal vein to maximise urethral length. In 2010, Bocciardi's team in Milan proposed a novel posterior or 'Retzius-sparing' RARP (RS-RARP), mirroring the classic open perineal approach [2]. This allows avoidance of supporting structures, such as the puboprostatic ligaments, endopelvic fascia, and Santorini plexus, preserving the normal anatomy as much as possible and limiting damage that may contribute to improved postoperative continence and erectile function. There has been much heralding of the excellent functional outcomes in both the medical and the lay press, but as yet no focus or real mention of any potential downsides of this new technique.The RS-RARP approach demands staying very close to the prostate throughout its mobilisation by hugging the capsule, bladder neck sparing, and performing nerve sparing with dissection in an intra-or interfascial plane. The key attraction of this technique is proposed to be an earlier return to continence, with encouraging early results from Bocciardi's team. In their first 200 patients, performed by a single experienced surgeon, they found 90% of patients to be continent at 1 week after surgery, irrespective of learning curve [3]. These results were further supported by Rha's Korean group, who published a 50 patient-matched comparison study and found that 70% of patients in their RS-RARP group were completely dry at 1 month (70% vs 50% in the standard RARP group, P = 0.039) [4]. Neither of these studies used randomisation or blinding, and outcomes were reported subjectively. A subsequent randomised controlled trial (RCT) by Menon's group, at the Vattikuti Institute, allocated 60 patients to each arm to undergo either standard RARP or RS-RARP [5]. In a group of patients with low-and intermediate-risk localised prostate cancer (International Society of Urological Pathology [ISUP] grades 1-3), they found that 71% of patients were continent (0/1 pad/day) at 1 week after surgery vs 48% in the standard RARP group (P = 0.01). This rapid early return to continence was supported across multiple assessments: pad weight, time to continence, and the proportion of patients with no leakage at 1 month From the published results available, including this Level 1 evidence, there seems little doubt that 1 week after a RS-RARP men are more likely to be continent compared to standard RARP (Table 1) . [3][4][5]. However, this begs the question, is this an important outcome in a cancer operation? The median time to achieve continence was reduced by 6 days (RS-RARP 2 vs 8 days standard RARP), and from a patient-reported outcome measures perspective (IPSS qualityof-life score), a statistically significant difference w...