Literature DB >> 11919244

Risk of positive margins and biochemical recurrence in relation to nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy.

Mario Sofer1, Kara L Hamilton-Nelson, James J Schlesselman, Mark S Soloway.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the effect of nerve-sparing (NS) radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) on surgical margins and biochemical recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Location and incidence of positive surgical margins, recurrence, and time to recurrence were assessed in a consecutive series of 734 men who underwent RRP for localized prostate cancer from 1992 through February 2000. NS procedures were used in 33% (n = 240) of 734 patients studied.
RESULTS: Surgical margins were positive for 24% (n = 58) and 31% (n = 152) of NS and non-NS patients, respectively (P =.06). No significant difference between the groups was found in location of positive margins (P =.92). Prostate-specific antigen level greater than 10 ng/mL, extraprostatic extension, tumor volume more than 20%, capsular penetration, Gleason score > or = 7, positive margins, and seminal vesicle invasion were associated with significantly increased risk of recurrence. However, NS patients were not at increased risk of recurrence compared with non-NS patients (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.53 to 1.72). The cumulative risk of recurrence within 3 and 5 years of surgery in NS patients was 9.7% and 14.4%, respectively, as compared with 17.1% and 21.1% for non-NS patients.
CONCLUSION: In patients with localized prostate cancer, neither margin status nor biochemical-free survival within 5 years of surgery were altered by the nerve preservation technique. Given our experience, we recommend preservation of neurovascular bundles in these patients whenever the procedure is technically feasible.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11919244     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2002.07.069

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  14 in total

1.  Management of prostate cancer patients following radiation therapy after radical surgery referred from urology to radiation oncology departments in Spain.

Authors:  A Gómez Caamaño; A Zapatero; J López Torrecilla; X Maldonado
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2015-11-30       Impact factor: 3.405

2.  Intraoperative Frozen Section of the Prostate Reduces the Risk of Positive Margin Whilst Ensuring Nerve Sparing in Patients with Intermediate and High-Risk Prostate Cancer Undergoing Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: First Reported UK Series.

Authors:  Nikhil Vasdev; Samita Agarwal; Bhavan P Rai; Arany Soosainathan; Gregory Shaw; Sebastian Chang; Venkat Prasad; Gowrie Mohan-S; James M Adshead
Journal:  Curr Urol       Date:  2016-05-20

3.  Multiphoton microscopy for structure identification in human prostate and periprostatic tissue: implications in prostate cancer surgery.

Authors:  Ashutosh K Tewari; Maria M Shevchuk; Joshua Sterling; Sonal Grover; Michael Herman; Rajiv Yadav; Kumaran Mudalair; Abhishek Srivastava; Mark A Rubin; Warren R Zipfel; Frederick R Maxfield; Chris Xu; Watt W Webb; Sushmita Mukherjee
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2011-03-28       Impact factor: 5.588

4.  Guideline for optimization of surgical and pathological quality performance for radical prostatectomy in prostate cancer management: evidentiary base.

Authors:  Joseph L Chin; John Srigley; Linda A Mayhew; R Bryan Rumble; Claire Crossley; Amber Hunter; Neil Fleshner; Bish Bora; Robin McLeod; Sheila McNair; Bernard Langer; Andrew Evans
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 1.862

5.  Is the transition from open to robotic prostatectomy fair to your patients? A single-surgeon comparison with 2-year follow-up.

Authors:  Robert B Nadler; Jessica T Casey; Lee C Zhao; Neema Navai; Zachary L Smith; Ali Zhumkhawala; Amanda M Macejko
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2009-11-19

6.  Does nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy increase the risk of positive surgical margins and biochemical progression?

Authors:  Sultan Saud Alkhateeb; Shabbir M Alibhai; Antonio Finelli; Neil E Fleshner; Michael A Jewett; Alexandre R Zlotta; John Trachtenberg
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2010-05

7.  The effect of wide resection during radical prostatectomy on surgical margins.

Authors:  Luke T Lavallée; Andrew Stokl; Sonya Cnossen; Ranjeeta Mallick; Chris Morash; Ilias Cagiannos; Rodney H Breau
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2016 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.862

8.  Impact of nerve sparing on surgical margins and biochemical recurrence: results from the SEARCH database.

Authors:  J L Nelles; S J Freedland; J C Presti; M K Terris; W J Aronson; C L Amling; C J Kane
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2008-07-15       Impact factor: 5.554

9.  Impact of capsular incision on biochemical recurrence after radical perineal prostatectomy.

Authors:  K W Kwak; H M Lee; H Y Choi
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2009-06-02       Impact factor: 5.554

10.  Impact of fellowship training on one-year outcomes of robotic-assisted prostatectomy.

Authors:  David D Thiel; Ryan Hutchinson; Nancy Diehl; Andrea Tavlarides; Adrienne Williams; Alexander S Parker
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2012 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.172

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.