PURPOSE: Few groups have examined satisfaction after prostate cancer treatment. We determined 1) predictors of satisfaction between 3 months and 2 years after open radical retropubic prostatectomy, and 2) whether these factors are time dependent. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective cohort study included 1,542 men who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy from October 2000 to July 2008. The primary outcome was satisfaction self-assessed at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. We used multivariate logistic regression and repeated measures analysis to determine predictors of satisfaction, adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Median followup was 24 months. About 93% of the men were satisfied. On multivariate analysis men were significantly less satisfied at 3 months when the urinary catheter was indwelling for 3 weeks or greater (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.10-0.54), or they required intervention for anastomotic stricture (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.11-0.49) or experienced 4-point or greater worsening in American Urological Association symptom score (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.13-0.49). At 6 months worsening urinary function (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.13-0.88) and biochemical failure (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.05-0.43) were significantly associated with satisfaction. Worsening sexual function became significant at 12 and 24 months. These associations were confirmed on repeated measures analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Most men were satisfied after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Satisfaction determinants showed a nonsignificant trend toward time dependence. Postoperative factors, such as the duration of indwelling Foley catheterization, were associated with short-term satisfaction while sexual and urinary function, and biochemical failure were associated with long-term satisfaction. Based on high satisfaction rates open radical retropubic prostatectomy is an excellent treatment for prostate cancer.
PURPOSE: Few groups have examined satisfaction after prostate cancer treatment. We determined 1) predictors of satisfaction between 3 months and 2 years after open radical retropubic prostatectomy, and 2) whether these factors are time dependent. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective cohort study included 1,542 men who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy from October 2000 to July 2008. The primary outcome was satisfaction self-assessed at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. We used multivariate logistic regression and repeated measures analysis to determine predictors of satisfaction, adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Median followup was 24 months. About 93% of the men were satisfied. On multivariate analysis men were significantly less satisfied at 3 months when the urinary catheter was indwelling for 3 weeks or greater (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.10-0.54), or they required intervention for anastomotic stricture (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.11-0.49) or experienced 4-point or greater worsening in American Urological Association symptom score (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.13-0.49). At 6 months worsening urinary function (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.13-0.88) and biochemical failure (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.05-0.43) were significantly associated with satisfaction. Worsening sexual function became significant at 12 and 24 months. These associations were confirmed on repeated measures analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Most men were satisfied after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Satisfaction determinants showed a nonsignificant trend toward time dependence. Postoperative factors, such as the duration of indwelling Foley catheterization, were associated with short-term satisfaction while sexual and urinary function, and biochemical failure were associated with long-term satisfaction. Based on high satisfaction rates open radical retropubic prostatectomy is an excellent treatment for prostate cancer.
Authors: Alexander Kretschmer; Alexander Buchner; Markus Grabbert; Anne Sommer; Annika Herlemann; Christian G Stief; Ricarda M Bauer Journal: World J Urol Date: 2017-01-16 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Louie E Ross; Daniel L Howard; Janice V Bowie; Roland J Thorpe; Ballington L Kinlock; Carol Burt; Thomas A LaVeist Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Cédric Baumann; Anne-Christine Rat; Didier Mainard; Christian Cuny; Francis Guillemin Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2011-04-30 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: A Miernik; E Farin; F E Kuehhas; W K Karcz; T Keck; T Wengenmayer; M Kollum; C Bach; N Buchholz; M Schoenthaler Journal: Chirurg Date: 2013-06 Impact factor: 0.955
Authors: Matthew J Resnick; Thomas J Guzzo; Janet E Cowan; Sara J Knight; Peter R Carroll; David F Penson Journal: BJU Int Date: 2012-08-29 Impact factor: 5.588