Literature DB >> 30790014

Outcomes after salvage radical prostatectomy and first-line radiation therapy or HIFU for recurrent localized prostate cancer: results from a multicenter study.

Romain Clery1, Pietro Grande1, Thomas Seisen1, Aurélien Gobert2, Igor Duquesne3, Arnauld Villers4, Jonathan Olivier4, Jean-Christophe Bernhard5, Grégoire Robert5, Jean Baptiste Beauval6, Thomas Prudhomme6, Franck Bruyère7, Paul Lainé-Caroff7, David Waltregny8, Bertrand Guillonneau9, Daniele Panarello9, Alain Ruffion10, Hubert De Bayser10, Alexandre de La Taille3, Morgan Roupret11.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Despite no consensus on the optimal management of recurrent prostate cancer after primary radiation or HIFU therapy, salvage prostatectomy (sRP) is reserved for only 3% of patients because of technical challenges and frequent post-operative complications. We assessed outcomes after sRP in a series of patients with localized PCa and that had received radiation therapy or HIFU as a first-line treatment.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from nine French referral centers on patients treated with sRP between 2005 and 2017 were collected. Pre- and post-operative data, including oncological and functional outcomes after first treatment and sRP, were analyzed to determine the predictors for biochemical recurrence (BCR) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) after sRP.
RESULTS: First-line treatments were external beam-radiation therapy (EBRT) for 30 (55%), brachytherapy (BT) for 10 (18%), and high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) for 15 (27%). Median (IQR) PSA at diagnosis was 6.4 (4.9-9.5) ng/mL, median PSA at nadir was 1.9 (0.7-3.0) ng/mL, and median (IQR) to first BCR was 13 (6-20) months. Of the 55 patients, 44 (80%) received robot-assisted salvage radical prostatectomy and 11 (20%) received salvage retropubic radical prostatectomy. Restoration of continence was achieved in 90% of preoperatively continent patients; 24% that had received nerve-sparing (NS) procedures were potent after surgery. Prolonged catheterization due to anastomotic leakage was the most common complication. Age, preoperative clinical stage, NS procedure, and a pathological Gleason score were predictors for BCR.
CONCLUSIONS: sRP was safe, feasible, and effective using either an open or robot-assisted approach, in experienced hands. Age, preoperative clinical stage, NS procedure, and pathological GS were linked with BCR after sRP.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Prostate neoplasm; Radical prostatectomy; Recurrence: radiation therapy; Salvage; Survival

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30790014     DOI: 10.1007/s00345-019-02683-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Urol        ISSN: 0724-4983            Impact factor:   4.226


  2 in total

1.  Salvage robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: oncologic and functional outcomes from two high-volume institutions.

Authors:  Gabriel Ogaya-Pinies; Estefania Linares-Espinos; Eduardo Hernandez-Cardona; Cathy Jenson; Xavier Cathelineau; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; Vipul Patel
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-07-13       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Robotic-assisted laparoscopic versus open salvage radical prostatectomy following radiotherapy.

Authors:  Patrick A Kenney; Cayce B Nawaf; Mahmoud Mustafa; Sijin Wen; Matthew F Wszolek; Curtis A Pettaway; John F Ward; John W Davis; Louis L Pisters
Journal:  Can J Urol       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 1.344

  2 in total
  3 in total

1.  Recurrence in prostate cancer: salvage diagnostic and therapeutic strategies.

Authors:  Sanchia Goonewardene
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Technical caveats in salvage robot assisted radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Ashwin Tamhankar; Alexander Hampson; Nikhil Vasdev
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2020-12

3.  Salvage Radiotherapy Plus Androgen Deprivation Therapy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer with Biochemical Failure after High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound as Primary Treatment.

Authors:  Ying-Che Huang; Chih-Hsiung Kang; Wei-Chia Lee; Yuan-Tso Cheng; Yao-Chi Chuang; Hung-Jen Wang; Fu-Min Fang; Po-Hui Chiang
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-07-30       Impact factor: 4.964

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.