Literature DB >> 23130676

Analysis of urological procedures in men who died from prostate cancer using a population-based approach.

Kara Babaian1, Matthew Truong, Jeremy Cetnar, Deanna S Cross, Fangfang Shi, Mark A Ritter, David F Jarrard.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Very few studies have examined end-of-life urological studies in men with prostate cancer. These studies reported fewer procedures in men who received primary therapy for prostate cancer. However, these studies were typically single institution or had a short follow-up period. The present study is the first population-based study examining end-of-life urological procedures and uses a geographic region encompassing 385 000 patients. Furthermore, this study incorporates both hospital- and office-based procedures. This approach has not been previously undertaken.
OBJECTIVE: To determine using a population-based approach whether men with end-stage prostate cancer who had definitive primary therapy might require fewer urological interventions. Repeated urological procedures can impact health-related quality of life in patients dying from prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using the Marshfield Epidemiological Study Area (MESA) database and tumour registry, we compared end-of-life interventions in men who died from prostate cancer between 1991 and 2009. Patient charts were queried for urological procedures using International Classification of Disease Modification, 9th edition (ICD9) codes for 3 years before death. Clinicopathological information was examined including whether the patient had a history of primary therapy (radiation or radical prostatectomy).
RESULTS: Among 280 patients dying from prostate cancer, 52 (19%) required 153 urological procedures during the last 3 years of life. The frequency of procedures increased closer to death. The most common procedures involved nephrostomy tube (56%), Foley catheter (24%) and transurethral resection of the prostate (10%). Clinicopathological features did not predict the need for an end-of-life urological procedure. There was no difference in the frequency of upper or lower tract procedures in surgery or radiation patients compared with patients without primary therapy (P = 0.556 and P = 0.508). Using a Kaplan-Meier analysis, there were no differences between groups in the proportion of patients not requiring a procedure (n = 280; P = 0.179).
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first population-based study to examine the frequency of urological procedures in patients with end-stage prostate cancer. A minority of patients (19%) required urological procedures during the final 3 years of life. A history of surgery or radiation did not influence the overall risk for urological intervention.
© 2012 BJU INTERNATIONAL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23130676      PMCID: PMC4209594          DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11517.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  21 in total

Review 1.  Complications of advanced prostate cancer.

Authors:  J A Smith; M S Soloway; M J Young
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 2.649

2.  Quality of the last year of life of older adults: 1986 vs 1993.

Authors:  Y Liao; D L McGee; G Cao; R S Cooper
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000-01-26       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Epidemiologic research in an integrated regional medical care system: the Marshfield Epidemiologic Study Area.

Authors:  F DeStefano; E D Eaker; S K Broste; D L Nordstrom; P L Peissig; R A Vierkant; K A Konitzer; R L Gruber; P M Layde
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  Long-term quality-of-life outcomes after radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting: the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group-4 randomised trial.

Authors:  Eva Johansson; Gunnar Steineck; Lars Holmberg; Jan-Erik Johansson; Tommy Nyberg; Mirja Ruutu; Anna Bill-Axelson
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2011-08-05       Impact factor: 41.316

5.  Quality of life for men receiving a second treatment for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Shelley A Arredondo; David M Latini; Natalia Sadetsky; Jun Kawakami; David J Pasta; Janeen DuChane; Peter R Carroll
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Need for hospital care and palliative treatment for prostate cancer treated with noncurative intent.

Authors:  G Aus; J Hugosson; L Norlén
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Complications arising in the final year of life in men dying from advanced prostate cancer.

Authors:  Richard Khafagy; David Shackley; Joanne Samuel; Kieran O'Flynn; Chris Betts; Noel Clarke
Journal:  J Palliat Med       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 2.947

Review 8.  Current prostate cancer treatments: effect on quality of life.

Authors:  Leonard G Gomella; James Johannes; Edouard J Trabulsi
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 2.649

9.  Bilateral orchiectomy with or without flutamide for metastatic prostate cancer.

Authors:  M A Eisenberger; B A Blumenstein; E D Crawford; G Miller; D G McLeod; P J Loehrer; G Wilding; K Sears; D J Culkin; I M Thompson; A J Bueschen; B A Lowe
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1998-10-08       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  A population-based study of pain and quality of life during the year before death in men with prostate cancer.

Authors:  G Sandblom; P Carlsson; K Sennfält; E Varenhorst
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2004-03-22       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.