Literature DB >> 28823768

Comparative Analysis of Partial Gland Ablation and Radical Prostatectomy to Treat Low and Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer: Oncologic and Functional Outcomes.

Silvia Garcia-Barreras1, Rafael Sanchez-Salas2, Arjun Sivaraman3, Eric Barret1, Fernando Secin4, Igor Nunes-Silva1, Estefania Linares-Espinós5, François Rozet1, Marc Galiano1, Xavier Cathelineau1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We analyzed the oncologic and functional outcomes of partial gland ablation compared with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in patients with low and intermediate risk prostate cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 1,883 patients underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and 373 underwent partial gland ablation from July 2009 to September 2015. We selected 1,458 of these participants for analysis, including 1,222 and 236 treated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and partial gland ablation, respectively. Patients had a Gleason score of 3 + 3 or 3 + 4, clinical stage T2b or less, prostate specific antigen 15 ng/dl or less, unilateral disease and life expectancy greater than 10 years. Propensity score matching analysis (1:2) was applied in the overall robot-assisted radical prostatectomy sample, which selected 472 patients for comparison. For partial gland ablation 188 men underwent high intensity focused ultrasound and 48 underwent cryotherapy. Oncologic outcomes were analyzed in terms of the need for salvage treatment. Partial gland ablation failure was defined as any positive control biopsy after treatment. Functional outcomes were assessed by validated questionnaires.
RESULTS: Matching was successful across the 2 groups, although men treated with partial gland ablation were older (p <0.001). Mean followup in the partial gland ablation group was 38.44 months. Partial gland ablation failure was observed in 68 men (28.8%), including 53 (28.1%) treated with high intensity focused ultrasound and 15 (31.2%) treated with cryotherapy. Partial gland ablation was associated with a higher risk of salvage treatment (HR 6.06, p <0.001). Complications were comparable between the groups (p = 0.06). Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy was associated with less continence recovery and a lower potency rate 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery (p <0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: In select patients with organ confined prostate cancer partial gland ablation offered good oncologic control with fewer adverse effects that required additional treatments. Potency and continence appeared to be better preserved after partial gland ablation.
Copyright © 2018 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cryotherapy; high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation; prostatectomy; prostatic neoplasms; robotic surgical procedures

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28823768     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.08.076

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  7 in total

1.  Oncological long-term outcome of whole gland HIFU and open radical prostatectomy: a comparative analysis.

Authors:  Bernd Rosenhammer; Roman Ganzer; Florian Zeman; Theresa Näger; Hans-Martin Fritsche; Andreas Blana; Maximilian Burger; Johannes Bründl
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2019-01-02       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Cryoablation, high-intensity focused ultrasound, irreversible electroporation, and vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy for prostate cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Run-Qi Guo; Xiao-Xiao Guo; Yuan-Ming Li; Zhi-Xin Bie; Bin Li; Xiao-Guang Li
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2021-01-02       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 3.  MR-guided biopsy and focal therapy: new options for prostate cancer management.

Authors:  Fuad F Elkhoury; Demetrios N Simopoulos; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 2.808

4.  High-Intensity Focused-Ultrasound Focal Therapy Versus Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: A Comparison of Oncological and Functional Outcomes in Low- and Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Łukasz Nyk; Wojciech Michalak; Stanisław Szempliński; Rafał Woźniak; Bartłomiej Zagożdżon; Wojciech Krajewski; Piotr Kryst; Hubert Kamecki; Sławomir Poletajew
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-02-09

Review 5.  Focal therapy for prostate cancer: what is really needed to move from investigational to valid therapeutic alternative?-a narrative review.

Authors:  Antony Pellegrino; Giuseppe O Cirulli; Elio Mazzone; Francesco Barletta; Simone Scuderi; Mario de Angelis; Giuseppe Rosiello; Giorgio Gandaglia; Francesco Montorsi; Alberto Briganti; Armando Stabile
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2022-07

Review 6.  Applications of Focused Ultrasound in the Treatment of Genitourinary Cancers.

Authors:  John Panzone; Timothy Byler; Gennady Bratslavsky; Hanan Goldberg
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-17       Impact factor: 6.639

Review 7.  Minimally invasive magnetic resonance image-guided prostate interventions.

Authors:  Annemarijke van Luijtelaar; Jurgen J Fütterer; Joyce Gr Bomers
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 3.039

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.