OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the benefit of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in the low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients suitable for active surveillance and in the high-risk PCa patients who would be considered for alternative treatments such as radiotherapy (RT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) instead of radical prostatectomy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Of 548 patients, who underwent RARP, 298 PCa patients (258 low-risk and 40 high-risk) with a mean of 3.6 years follow-up, were included into this study. Oncological outcomes were compared separately in low- and high-risk PCa patients. RESULTS: The pathologic Gleason scores were ≥7 in 73 (28%), and 68 (26%) patients had a pathologic stage of T3, 29 (11%) patients had a positive surgical margin (PSM), and 20 (7%) patients had biochemical recurrence (BCR) in the first year follow-up in the low-risk group. Of 258 low-risk PCa patients, a total of 93 (36%) patients had not either BCR, pathologic Gleason score ≥7, or ≥pT3 disease with PSM. In the high-risk group, the pathologic stage was pT2 in 14 (35%) patients and 29 (72%) patients had no biochemical recurrence in the follow-up of these high-risk PCa patients. Of 40 high-risk PCa patients, in a total of 25 (62.5%) patients ≥pT3b disease, BCR, pT3a disease with PSM were not detected. CONCLUSION: Approximately two thirds of high-risk PCa patients benefit from RARP without additional RT or ADT. Besides, more than one third of low-risk PCa patients who fit active surveillance criteria would have unfavorable results.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the benefit of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in the low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients suitable for active surveillance and in the high-risk PCa patients who would be considered for alternative treatments such as radiotherapy (RT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) instead of radical prostatectomy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Of 548 patients, who underwent RARP, 298 PCa patients (258 low-risk and 40 high-risk) with a mean of 3.6 years follow-up, were included into this study. Oncological outcomes were compared separately in low- and high-risk PCa patients. RESULTS: The pathologic Gleason scores were ≥7 in 73 (28%), and 68 (26%) patients had a pathologic stage of T3, 29 (11%) patients had a positive surgical margin (PSM), and 20 (7%) patients had biochemical recurrence (BCR) in the first year follow-up in the low-risk group. Of 258 low-risk PCa patients, a total of 93 (36%) patients had not either BCR, pathologic Gleason score ≥7, or ≥pT3 disease with PSM. In the high-risk group, the pathologic stage was pT2 in 14 (35%) patients and 29 (72%) patients had no biochemical recurrence in the follow-up of these high-risk PCa patients. Of 40 high-risk PCa patients, in a total of 25 (62.5%) patients ≥pT3b disease, BCR, pT3a disease with PSM were not detected. CONCLUSION: Approximately two thirds of high-risk PCa patients benefit from RARP without additional RT or ADT. Besides, more than one third of low-risk PCa patients who fit active surveillance criteria would have unfavorable results.
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: Prasanna Sooriakumaran; Jeffrey Karnes; Christian Stief; Bethan Copsey; Francesco Montorsi; Peter Hammerer; Burkhard Beyer; Marco Moschini; Christian Gratzke; Thomas Steuber; Nazareno Suardi; Alberto Briganti; Lukas Manka; Tommy Nyberg; Susan J Dutton; Peter Wiklund; Markus Graefen Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-05-30 Impact factor: 20.096
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: Robert K Nam; Patrick Cheung; Sender Herschorn; Refik Saskin; Jiandong Su; Laurence H Klotz; Michelle Chang; Girish S Kulkarni; Yuna Lee; Ronald T Kodama; Steven A Narod Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2014-01-17 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Frederik B Thomsen; Klaus Brasso; Laurence H Klotz; M Andreas Røder; Kasper D Berg; Peter Iversen Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2014-03-07 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Anthony V D'Amico; Judd Moul; Peter R Carroll; Leon Sun; Deborah Lubeck; Ming-Hui Chen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-06-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Bertram Yuh; Walter Artibani; Axel Heidenreich; Simon Kimm; Mani Menon; Giacomo Novara; Ashutosh Tewari; Karim Touijer; Timothy Wilson; Kevin C Zorn; Scott E Eggener Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-05-18 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Robin Wm Vernooij; Michelle Lancee; Anne Cleves; Philipp Dahm; Chris H Bangma; Katja Kh Aben Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2020-06-04