Literature DB >> 12441929

Cystectomy with prostate sparing for bladder cancer in 100 patients: 10-year experience.

Guy Vallancien1, Hazem Abou El Fettouh, Xavier Cathelineau, Herve Baumert, Gaelle Fromont, Bertrand Guillonneau.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To minimize the risk of incontinence and impotence without compromising oncological outcome, we performed prostate sparing surgery during radical cystectomy for bladder cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Since 1992, 100 patients with a mean age of 64 years (range 48 to 82) underwent cystectomy for bladder transitional cell carcinoma with prostate sparing based on normal digital rectal examination of the prostate, normal prostate specific antigen (PSA), percent free PSA greater than 15 and normal transrectal ultrasound of the prostate. Prostate biopsies to exclude prostate cancer were performed on patients with an abnormal digital rectal examination, high PSA, percent free PSA less than 15 or hypoechoic lesions on ultrasound. Surgery consisted of transurethral resection of the prostate with analysis of frozen section of the prostatic urethra and transitional prostate and cystectomy with reconstruction by a Z ileal bladder anastomosed to the prostatic capsule after confirmation of the absence of prostate or bladder cancer on frozen sections of the surgical capsule specimens. Patients were followed closely with imaging and laboratory studies every 6 months and annually for 3 years thereafter.
RESULTS: Perioperative death occurred in 1 patient due to septicemia, 20 patients (20%) died of cancer and 6 (6%) died of nonrelated cancer causes. Mean followup 38 months (range 2 to 111). Postoperative pathological stage was PT0 in 2 cases, PtaT1 in 22, PT2 in 48, PT 3 in 28 and N+ in 13. The 5-year actuarial global survival according to pathological stage was pTaT1N0 in 96% of cases, pT2N0 in 83%, pT3N0 in 71% and N+ in 54% (p = 0.0001). The 5-year actuarial cancer specific survival was PT0, Ta T1 in 90% of cases, PT2 in 73%, PT3 in 63% and N- in 8%. The cancer specific survival according to pathological grade was 100% for well differentiated tumors (grade I), 76% for moderately differentiated tumors (grade II) and 47% for poorly differentiated tumors (grade III) (p = 0.003). Local recurrence was pTaT1N0 in 1 of 22 cases (4.5%), pT2N0 in 2 of 40 (5%), pT3N0 in 2 of 23 (8.5%) and N+ in 0 of 13 (0%). Prostate cancer was diagnosed in 3 patients (2 errors in the diagnosis and 1 cancer de novo within 5 years of followup). At 1-year followup 86 of 88 patients (97%) are fully continent (no pad) during the day, and 84 (95%) void 1 to 2 times a night to stay dry. Of 61 patients with previously adequate sexual function 50 (82%) maintained potency with retrograde ejaculation secondary to transurethral resection, 6 (10%) have partial potency and 5 (8.1%) are impotent.
CONCLUSIONS: Cystectomy with prostate sparing for bladder cancer is feasible and offers promising functional results with no additional oncological risk. Careful selection of patients is mandatory.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12441929     DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000036521.21034.ec

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  23 in total

Review 1.  [Urinary diversion after cystectomy].

Authors:  P Albers
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  [Tips and tricks for nerve-sparing cystectomy].

Authors:  S Madersbacher; W Hochreiter; U E Studer
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 3.  [Treatment of bladder cancer. Value of radical prostate-sparing cystectomy].

Authors:  A Heidenreich; D Porres; D Pfister
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 4.  [Standards and perspectives in diagnosis and therapy of bladder carcinoma].

Authors:  C Stief; D Zaak; M Stöckle; U Studer; R Knuechel; C Rödel; R Sauer; H Rubben
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 0.639

5.  Prevalence of incidental prostate cancer in patients undergoing radical cystoprostatectomy: data from China and other Asian countries.

Authors:  Yi-Ping Zhu; Ding-Wei Ye; Xu-Dong Yao; Shi-Lin Zhang; Bo Dai; Hai-Liang Zhang; Yi-Jun Shen; Yao Zhu; Guo-Hai Shi
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2008-12-01       Impact factor: 3.285

6.  Is sparing the prostate still considered radical cystectomy? The case against prostate-sparing cystectomy for bladder cancer.

Authors:  Ahmed Kotb; Armen G Aprikian
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 1.862

7.  The case for prostate capsule-sparing radical cystectomy in selected patients.

Authors:  Laurence Klotz; Jehonathan Pinthus
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 1.862

8.  Prostate capsule sparing versus nerve sparing radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: results of a randomized, controlled trial.

Authors:  Bruce L Jacobs; Stephanie Daignault; Cheryl T Lee; Khaled S Hafez; Jeffrey S Montgomery; James E Montie; Jean E Humrich; Brent K Hollenbeck; David P Wood; Alon Z Weizer
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2014-07-24       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Prostate capsule sparing radical cystectomy: oncologic safety and clinical outcome.

Authors:  Laurence Klotz
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2009-04

10.  The incidence of prostate cancer and urothelial cancer in the prostate in cystoprostatectomy specimens in a tertiary care Canadian centre.

Authors:  Sri Sivalingam; Darrel Drachenberg
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.862

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.