Literature DB >> 22654325

Prospective randomised controlled trial comparing sub-epididymal orchiectomy versus conventional orchiectomy in metastatic carcinoma of prostate.

Shivadeo Bapat1, Pratikshit M Mahajan, Ashish A Bhave, Yogesh B Kshirsagar, Yogesh B Sovani, Abhirudra Mulay.   

Abstract

Androgen blockade (surgical or medical castration) is a standard procedure for patients with metastatic carcinoma prostate. Sub-epididymal orchiectomy involves removal of testis leaving behind epididymis. This epididymal stump over a period gives a pseudo testicular feel within the scrotum. We present a prospective randomized study to assess the functional utility of this procedure and compare it with total orchiectomy in terms of achieving castrate levels. From July 2005-Jan 2008, 60 patients with metastatic carcinoma prostate were alternately randomised and allotted to two groups, 30 underwent sub-epididymal orchiectomy (group A) and remaining 30 (group B) underwent total orchiectomy. Age: 56-80 years. Serum PSA: 55-268 ng/ml. Preoperative serum testosterone: Group A-300-650 ng/ml and group B-320-640 ng/ml. Postoperative serum testosterone: group A-2-18 ng\ml and group B-7-15 ng\ml on day 7 after surgery. Operating time-26-40 mins for group A and 20-34 mins for group B. Follow up-6 weeks and 3 months. At 3 months patients were asked to grade appearance of scrotum for asthetic value on a scale of 1-100 using visual analogue score. Postoperative serum testosterone reached castrate levels in seven days (both groups). Duration of surgery in both groups was comparable. Complications-wound infection in 1 patient (group A) &amp; 1 scrotal hematoma (group B). Satisfaction score for group A (83.5 ± 9.7) was significantly (p < 0.05) better (95%CI-18.58-28.42), compared to that of group B (60 ± 9.4) by using't' test. Sub epididymal orchiectomy is comparable to total orchiectomy in terms of achieving castrate levels with similar operating time. It has significant advantage in terms of mental satisfaction to patients. It is a simple and safe procedure that can be conveniently performed in an outpatient clinic setting using pure local anaesthesia.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Epididymis sparing orchiectomy; Epididymoplasty

Year:  2011        PMID: 22654325      PMCID: PMC3087051          DOI: 10.1007/s12262-010-0207-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Surg        ISSN: 0973-9793            Impact factor:   0.656


  9 in total

1.  Subepididymal orchiectomy: the acceptable alternative.

Authors:  J F Glenn
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Cosmetic orchiectomy. Surgical technique that meets medical and psychologic needs of patients with advanced prostatic carcinoma.

Authors:  R K Chiou
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1990-07       Impact factor: 2.649

3.  Epididymal sparing bilateral simple orchiectomy with epididymoplasty: preservation of esthetics and body image.

Authors:  Muta M Issa; Thomas S Lendvay; Rafael Bouet; Mark R Young; John A Petros; Fray F Marshall
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Cost-effectiveness of androgen suppression therapies in advanced prostate cancer.

Authors:  A M Bayoumi; A D Brown; A M Garber
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2000-11-01       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  The cost value of medical versus surgical hormonal therapy for metastatic prostate cancer.

Authors:  J K Chon; S C Jacobs; M J Naslund
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Cosmetic orchiectomy using pedicled fibro-fatty tissue graft for prostate cancer: a new approach.

Authors:  K Kihara; H Oshima
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 20.096

7.  Spermatic cord anesthesia block for scrotal procedures in outpatient clinic setting.

Authors:  Muta M Issa; Kenneth Hsiao; Yaser S Bassel; Rafael Bouet; Mark R Young; John A Petros
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Medical versus surgical androgen suppression therapy for prostate cancer: a 10-year longitudinal cost study.

Authors:  A J Mariani; M Glover; S Arita
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Subcapsular orchiectomy with intracapsular testicular prosthesis for metastatic prostate carcinoma.

Authors:  K L Short; L W Howerton; H Holt; M Amin
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1984-07       Impact factor: 2.649

  9 in total
  3 in total

1.  95 % confidence interval: a misunderstood statistical tool.

Authors:  Deepti Choudhary; Pankaj Kumar Garg
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2012-06-17       Impact factor: 0.656

2.  Satisfaction and genital perception after orchiectomy for prostate cancer: does the technique matter? A randomized trial.

Authors:  Onkar Singh; Partho Mukherjee; M S Sakthivel; Cornerstone Wann; A J P George; Rajesh Gopalakrishnan; Belavendra Antonisamy; Antony Devasia; Santosh Kumar; Nitin S Kekre; J Chandrasingh
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2021-04-13       Impact factor: 2.370

3.  Cosmetic Appeal, HRQoL, and Effectiveness of Simple and Pseudotesticular Techniques of Orchidectomy in Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Ijeoma N C Chibuzo; Augustine O Takure; Olayiwola B Shittu; Linus I Okeke
Journal:  Prostate Cancer       Date:  2021-11-26
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.