INTRODUCTION: We assessed the incidence of contralateral prostate cancer (cPCa), contralateral EPE (cEPE) and contralateral positive surgical margins (cPSM) in patients diagnosed preoperatively with unilateral prostate cancer and evaluated risk factors predictive of contralateral disease extension. METHODS: The occurrence of cPCa, cEPE and cPSM and the side-specific nerve-sparing technique performed were collected postoperatively from 327 men diagnosed with unilateral prostate cancer at biopsy. Parameters, such as the localization, proportion, and percentage of cancer in positive cores, were prospectively collected. RESULTS: Overall, 50.5% of patients had bilateral disease, and were at higher risk when associated with a positive biopsy core at the apex (p = 0.016). The overall incidence of ipsilateral EPE and cEPE were 21.4% and 3.4%, respectively (p < 0.001). Compared to cPCa, ipsilateral disease was at an almost 4-fold higher risk of extending out of the prostate (p < 0.001). None of the criteria tested were identified as useful predictors for cEPE. The low incidence of cEPE in our cohort could limit our ability to detect significance. The overall incidence of ipsilateral PSM and cPSM were 15.3% and 5.8%, respectively (p < 0.001). More aggressive nerve-sparing was not associated with a higher incidence of PSM. Prostate sides selected for more aggressive nerve-sparing were associated with younger patients (p < 0.001), a smaller prostate (p = 0.006), and a lower percentage of cancer in biopsy material (p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: Although the risk of cPCa is high in patients diagnosed with unilateral prostate cancer at biopsy, the risk of cEPE and cPSM is low, yet not insignificant. Contralateral aggressive nerve-sparing should be used with caution and should not compromise oncological outcome.
INTRODUCTION: We assessed the incidence of contralateral prostate cancer (cPCa), contralateral EPE (cEPE) and contralateral positive surgical margins (cPSM) in patients diagnosed preoperatively with unilateral prostate cancer and evaluated risk factors predictive of contralateral disease extension. METHODS: The occurrence of cPCa, cEPE and cPSM and the side-specific nerve-sparing technique performed were collected postoperatively from 327 men diagnosed with unilateral prostate cancer at biopsy. Parameters, such as the localization, proportion, and percentage of cancer in positive cores, were prospectively collected. RESULTS: Overall, 50.5% of patients had bilateral disease, and were at higher risk when associated with a positive biopsy core at the apex (p = 0.016). The overall incidence of ipsilateral EPE and cEPE were 21.4% and 3.4%, respectively (p < 0.001). Compared to cPCa, ipsilateral disease was at an almost 4-fold higher risk of extending out of the prostate (p < 0.001). None of the criteria tested were identified as useful predictors for cEPE. The low incidence of cEPE in our cohort could limit our ability to detect significance. The overall incidence of ipsilateral PSM and cPSM were 15.3% and 5.8%, respectively (p < 0.001). More aggressive nerve-sparing was not associated with a higher incidence of PSM. Prostate sides selected for more aggressive nerve-sparing were associated with younger patients (p < 0.001), a smaller prostate (p = 0.006), and a lower percentage of cancer in biopsy material (p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: Although the risk of cPCa is high in patients diagnosed with unilateral prostate cancer at biopsy, the risk of cEPE and cPSM is low, yet not insignificant. Contralateral aggressive nerve-sparing should be used with caution and should not compromise oncological outcome.
Authors: Vincenzo Ficarra; Giacomo Novara; Thomas E Ahlering; Anthony Costello; James A Eastham; Markus Graefen; Giorgio Guazzoni; Mani Menon; Alexandre Mottrie; Vipul R Patel; Henk Van der Poel; Raymond C Rosen; Ashutosh K Tewari; Timothy G Wilson; Filiberto Zattoni; Francesco Montorsi Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2012-06-01 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Kevin C Zorn; Hugues Widmer; Jean-Baptiste Lattouf; Dan Liberman; Naeem Bhojani; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Maxine Sun; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Ronald Denis; Assaad El-Hakim Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: R Miano; C De Nunzio; F J Kim; B Rocco; P Gontero; C Vicentini; S Micali; M Oderda; S Masciovecchio; A D Asimakopoulos Journal: Int Braz J Urol Date: 2014 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.541
Authors: Vincenzo Ficarra; Giacomo Novara; Raymond C Rosen; Walter Artibani; Peter R Carroll; Anthony Costello; Mani Menon; Francesco Montorsi; Vipul R Patel; Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg; Henk Van der Poel; Timothy G Wilson; Filiberto Zattoni; Alexandre Mottrie Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2012-06-01 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Ashutosh K Tewari; Abhishek Srivastava; Kumaran Mudaliar; Gerald Y Tan; Sonal Grover; Youssef El Douaihy; David Peters; Robert Leung; Rajiv Yadav; Majnu John; James Wysock; E Daracott Vaughan; Sara Muir; Mahul B Amin; Mark Rubin; Jiangling Tu; Mohammed Akthar; Maria Shevchuk Journal: BJU Int Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: M Graefen; A Haese; U Pichlmeier; P G Hammerer; J Noldus; K Butz; A Erbersdobler; R P Henke; U Michl; S Fernandez; H Huland Journal: J Urol Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Andrea Gallina; Carmen Maccagnano; Nazareno Suardi; Umberto Capitanio; Firas Abdollah; Marco Raber; Andrea Salonia; Vincenzo Scattoni; Patrizio Rigatti; Francesco Montorsi; Alberto Briganti Journal: BJU Int Date: 2011-11-17 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Fernando P Secin; Angel Serio; Fernando J Bianco; Nicholas T Karanikolas; Kentaro Kuroiwa; Andrew Vickers; Karim Touijer; Bertrand Guillonneau Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2006-11-03 Impact factor: 20.096