Literature DB >> 2219579

Patient selection for, results of, and impact on tumor resection of potency-sparing radical prostatectomy.

W J Catalona1.   

Abstract

Our results show that by using the nerve-sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy, potency can be preserved in the majority of appropriately selected patients without compromising the adequacy of tumor excision. However, proper patient selection is important. Patients with focal, well-differentiated tumors, especially young patients with stage A or B1 tumors, are ideal candidates. In patients with more extensive and less well-differentiated tumors, there is a higher risk of incomplete tumor excision. Although we suspect that the adequacy of tumor excision is determined more by the extent of the tumor than by the technique of radical prostatectomy used, we believe that nerve-sparing surgery should be used with great caution, if at all, in patients with extensive or high-grade tumors. In these patients, microscopic extracapsular tumor extension is extremely common, can be impossible to detect at the time of operation, and is less likely to be adequately encompassed by nerve-sparing techniques. On the other hand, our current data provide little evidence that excision of the neurovascular bundles is beneficial. It is possible that more extensive resections will not materially alter the incidence of positive margins or cure rates. Finally, it might be argued that all forms of radical prostatectomy are inappropriate for patients with poorly differentiated clinical stage B2 prostate cancer for whom there are no really effective treatment options. We continue to recommend radical prostatectomy for these patients based on the finding that patients with clinical stage B2 disease who have organ-confined tumors can be expected to have excellent long-term disease-free survival rates similar to those of clinical stage B1 patients. In the remaining patients who are clinically understaged, the prospects for the minimal microscopic tumor remaining being controlled with adjunctive radiation therapy may be better than those of controlling the bulky primary tumor with radiation therapy alone. This hypothesis will need to be tested in a randomized clinical trial.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2219579

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urol Clin North Am        ISSN: 0094-0143            Impact factor:   2.241


  4 in total

Review 1.  Radical prostatectomy and prostate cancer screening: the need for national audit and research.

Authors:  R R Hall
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 1.891

2.  Screening for prostate cancer. How can patients give informed consent?

Authors:  K G Marshall
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 3.275

Review 3.  Selection of patients for nerve sparing surgery in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  André N Vis; Roderick C N van den Bergh; Henk G van der Poel; Alexander Mottrie; Philip D Stricker; Marcus Graefen; Vipul Patel; Bernardo Rocco; Birgit Lissenberg-Witte; Pim J van Leeuwen
Journal:  BJUI Compass       Date:  2021-11-09

4.  Evaluating the Impact of PSA as a Selection Criteria for Nerve Sparing Radical Prostatectomy in a Screened Cohort.

Authors:  Shyam K Tanguturi; Ming-Hui Chen; Marian Loffredo; Jerome P Richie; Anthony V D'Amico
Journal:  Prostate Cancer       Date:  2014-04-16
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.