Literature DB >> 18594827

Radical prostatectomy for low risk carcinoma of the prostate.

Joseph A Smith1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To review the role of radical prostatectomy in the management of patients with low risk carcinoma of the prostate.
METHODS: A summary of personal experience and pertinent literature is provided. In particular, information which permits conclusions on the efficacy and side effects of radical prostatectomy in this situation is considered.
RESULTS: For patients with low risk carcinoma of the prostate who choose to undergo treatment with curative intent, radical prostatectomy is an excellent option. Removal of the prostate with negative surgical margins can be achieved with a high frequency. Patients are afforded these curity of an undetectable PSA postoperatively which helps eliminate some of the inherent concerns which go along with an untreated or inadequately treated tumor. Recent modifications in surgical approach, including laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgery, have lessened even further the impact of surgery on quality of life.
CONCLUSION: Some patients with low risk disease who undergo radical prostatectomy are over treated and cured of a cancer which may not have been a significant threat to life or health. However, the uncertainty of active surveillance leads many patients to pursue curative therapy and radical prostatectomy offers an extremely low risk of death from prostate cancer, even with long term follow-up. Erectile dysfunction remains a potential quality of life compromise for some patients but, otherwise, the overwhelming majority return to their preoperative status within a short time with minimal risk for quality of life compromise.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18594827     DOI: 10.1007/s00345-008-0293-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Urol        ISSN: 0724-4983            Impact factor:   4.226


  16 in total

1.  Achieving optimal outcomes after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Jeffery W Saranchuk; Michael W Kattan; Elena Elkin; A Karim Touijer; Peter T Scardino; James A Eastham
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-06-20       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Patient treatment preferences in localized prostate carcinoma: The influence of emotion, misconception, and anecdote.

Authors:  Thomas D Denberg; Trisha V Melhado; John F Steiner
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2006-08-01       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 3.  Active surveillance for prostate cancer: for whom?

Authors:  Laurence Klotz
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-11-10       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy versus retropubic radical prostatectomy: a prospective assessment of postoperative pain.

Authors:  Todd M Webster; S Duke Herrell; Sam S Chang; Michael S Cookson; Roxelyn G Baumgartner; Laura W Anderson; Joseph A Smith
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 5.  The evidence-based pathway for peri-operative management of open and robotically assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Melissa R Kaufman; Roxelyn G Baumgartner; Laura W Anderson; Joseph A Smith; Sam S Chang; S Duke Herrell; Michael S Cookson
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2007-02-19       Impact factor: 5.588

6.  Potency, continence and complication rates in 1,870 consecutive radical retropubic prostatectomies.

Authors:  W J Catalona; G F Carvalhal; D E Mager; D S Smith
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Comparison of length of hospital stay between radical retropubic prostatectomy and robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy.

Authors:  Bradford Nelson; Melissa Kaufman; Gregory Broughton; Michael S Cookson; Sam S Chang; S Duke Herrell; Roxelyn G Baumgartner; Joseph A Smith
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  What percentage of patients with newly diagnosed carcinoma of the prostate are candidates for surveillance? An analysis of the CaPSURE database.

Authors:  Daniel A Barocas; Janet E Cowan; Joseph A Smith; Peter R Carroll
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2008-08-15       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  The surgical learning curve for prostate cancer control after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers; Fernando J Bianco; Angel M Serio; James A Eastham; Deborah Schrag; Eric A Klein; Alwyn M Reuther; Michael W Kattan; J Edson Pontes; Peter T Scardino
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2007-07-24       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 10.  Continuing controversy over monitoring men with localized prostate cancer: a systematic review of programs in the prostate specific antigen era.

Authors:  Richard M Martin; David Gunnell; Freddie Hamdy; David Neal; Athene Lane; Jenny Donovan
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 7.450

View more
  2 in total

1.  Outcomes after radical prostatectomy among men who are candidates for active surveillance: results from the SEARCH database.

Authors:  Christopher J Kane; Ronald Im; Christopher L Amling; Joseph C Presti; William J Aronson; Martha K Terris; Stephen J Freedland
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2010-04-15       Impact factor: 2.649

2.  Patients treated with radical prostatectomy with positive digital rectal examination findings in the intermediate-risk group are prone to PSA recurrence.

Authors:  Nobuki Furubayashi; Takahito Negishi; Shintaro Ura; Jun Mutaguchi; Kenichi Taguchi; Mototsugu Shimokawa; Motonobu Nakamura
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2016-04-20       Impact factor: 2.967

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.