Literature DB >> 23053039

[Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in elderly patients: surgical, oncological and functional outcomes].

D Porres1, D Pfister, A P Labanaris, V Zugor, J H Witt, A Heidenreich.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the perioperative oncological and functional outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RALP) in older men. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The records of n = 2,000 men who underwent RALP from February 2006 to April 2010 were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 45 patients ≥ 75 years were indentified. Subsequently this subgroup was compared to the overall patient cohort with regard to perioperative results, pathological tumor stage, functional outcomes after 12 months and the prostate cancer-specific mortality and biochemical recurrence free survival.
RESULTS: The following results reflect the comparison of the cohort of patients who were ≥75 years of age versus the overall cohort of patients. A statistical difference of the parameters analyzed was observed only for minor complications 15.5 % versus 11.4 % (p<0.05), neurovascular bundle (NVB) preservation 51.1 % versus 65.7 % (p<0.05) and potency after 12 months 39.6 % versus 66.2 % (p<0.001). Major complications were noted in 2.2 % versus 1.3 % of cases. A Gleason score <7 was noted in 37.4 % versus 42.8 %, a Gleason score 7 in 51.1 % versus 47.7 % and a Gleason score >7 in 11.6 % versus 9.5 %. Tumor stages pT2 and pT3 were noted in 68.8 % versus 73.5 % and in 31.2 % versus 25.2 %, respectively. The positive surgical margin status was encountered in 11.1 % versus 8.9 % of cases, respectively. At 12 months 86.9 % versus 92.8 % of patients were continent and 39.6 % versus 66.2 % were potent, respectively. After a median follow-up of 17.2 months the prostate cancer-specific mortality in the subgroup of elderly patients was 0 % and the biochemical recurrence-free survival was 95.5%.
CONCLUSIONS: The RALP approach in patients ≥75 years of age is a safe surgical procedure with a limited complication rate, excellent oncologic and continence outcomes as well as acceptable erectile function. Nevertheless, RALP should be limited to a selected cohort of patients with a good health status and an individual life expectancy of more than 10 years. For the assessment of the final oncological benefits of RALP in this patient population a longer follow-up is necessary.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23053039     DOI: 10.1007/s00120-012-2925-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urologe A        ISSN: 0340-2592            Impact factor:   0.639


  32 in total

1.  Deaths: preliminary data for 2000.

Authors:  A M Minino; B L Smith
Journal:  Natl Vital Stat Rep       Date:  2001-10-09

Review 2.  Evidence from robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review.

Authors:  Vincenzo Ficarra; Stefano Cavalleri; Giacomo Novara; Maurizio Aragona; Walter Artibani
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2006-06-30       Impact factor: 20.096

3.  EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease.

Authors:  Axel Heidenreich; Joaquim Bellmunt; Michel Bolla; Steven Joniau; Malcolm Mason; Vsevolod Matveev; Nicolas Mottet; Hans-Peter Schmid; Theo van der Kwast; Thomas Wiegel; Filliberto Zattoni
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2010-10-28       Impact factor: 20.096

4.  Patterns of care related to age of men with prostate cancer.

Authors:  C L Bennett; S Greenfield; H Aronow; P Ganz; N J Vogelzang; R M Elashoff
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1991-05-15       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Cancer screening in elderly patients: a framework for individualized decision making.

Authors:  L C Walter; K E Covinsky
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-06-06       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Variations in morbidity after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Colin B Begg; Elyn R Riedel; Peter B Bach; Michael W Kattan; Deborah Schrag; Joan L Warren; Peter T Scardino
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-04-11       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Primary treatment choices for men with clinically localized prostate carcinoma detected by screening.

Authors:  Y Yan; G F Carvalhal; W J Catalona; J D Young
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2000-03-01       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Survival in prostate cancer patients > or = 70 years after radical prostatectomy and comparison to younger patients.

Authors:  Jesco Pfitzenmaier; Sascha Pahernik; Stephan Buse; Axel Haferkamp; Nenad Djakovic; Markus Hohenfellner
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2009-04-26       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 9.  Epidemiology of prostate cancer.

Authors:  E David Crawford
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2003-12-22       Impact factor: 2.649

10.  Radical prostatectomy in men aged >or=70 years: effect of age on upgrading, upstaging, and the accuracy of a preoperative nomogram.

Authors:  Lee Richstone; Fernando J Bianco; Hiral H Shah; Michael W Kattan; James A Eastham; Peter T Scardino; Douglas S Scherr
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 5.588

View more
  2 in total

1.  [Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery in urology: feasability of a transrectal, flexible retroperitoneoscopy in a porcine model].

Authors:  T Bschleipfer; A Hackethal; S Tacke; P Collet
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  Outcome of Robotic Radical Prostatectomy in Men Over 74.

Authors:  Burkhard Ubrig; Anselm Boy; Markus Heiland; Alexander Roosen
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2018-01-24       Impact factor: 2.942

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.