Literature DB >> 30904357

Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy After Focal Therapy: Oncological, Functional Outcomes and Predictors of Recurrence.

Lorenzo Marconi1, Thomas Stonier2, Rafael Tourinho-Barbosa3, Caroline Moore4, Hashim U Ahmed5, Xavier Cathelineau3, Mark Emberton6, Rafael Sanchez-Salas3, Paul Cathcart7.   

Abstract

There are few data on the outcomes and toxicity of radical prostatectomy (RP) among men experiencing local recurrence of prostate cancer (PC) following focal therapy (FT). To characterise perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes after salvage robot-assisted RP (S-RALP) and determine the risk factors for S-RALP failure, we conducted a multicentre cohort study of 82 patients undergoing S-RALP after FT. All had histological confirmation of PC recurrence, with metastatic disease excluded using pelvic magnetic resonance imaging, a bone scan, and/or positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Progression-free survival was 74%, 48%, and 36% at 12, 24, and 36mo after surgery, respectively. The 12-mo continence rate was 83%. There were no intraoperative complications and no major postoperative complications. On multivariable analysis, only infield recurrence (hazard ratio [HR] 3.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-12.85; p=0.03) and pT3b stage (HR 5.0, 95% CI 1.53-16.39; p=0.008) were independent predictors of recurrence. This study represents the largest series of salvage surgery after FT and shows that this approach is safe with no increase in toxicity when compared to primary RALP. Men identified as having infield recurrence after FT appear to have phenotypically aggressive disease and should be counselled regarding the potential need for a multimodal therapeutic approach. PATIENT
SUMMARY: Robotic surgery after focal therapy for prostate cancer is safe and achieves postoperative continence results similar to those for robotic radical prostatectomy in treatment-naïve patients. However, if the cancer recurrence is within the previously treated field, the oncological prognosis seems to be worse.
Copyright © 2019 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cryotherapy; Focal therapy; HIFU; Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy; Robotic surgery; Salvage surgery

Year:  2019        PMID: 30904357     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.03.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  8 in total

1.  Making a case "for" focal therapy of the prostate in intermediate risk prostate cancer: current perspective and ongoing trials.

Authors:  Alex Z Wang; Amir H Lebastchi; Luke P O'Connor; Michael Ahdoot; Sherif Mehralivand; Nitin Yerram; Samir S Taneja; Arvin K George; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; John F Ward; Pilar Laguna; Jean de la Rosette; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-01-02       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 2.  Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer in the era of routine multi-parametric MRI.

Authors:  M J Connor; M A Gorin; H U Ahmed; R Nigam
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2020-02-12       Impact factor: 5.554

Review 3.  Current status and future prospective of focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: development of multiparametric MRI, MRI-TRUS fusion image-guided biopsy, and treatment modalities.

Authors:  Sunao Shoji; Shinichiro Hiraiwa; Izumi Hanada; Hakushi Kim; Masahiro Nitta; Masanori Hasegawa; Yoshiaki Kawamura; Kazunobu Hashida; Takuma Tajiri; Akira Miyajima
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-02-10       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  Peri-operative, functional and early oncologic outcomes of salvage robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy after high-intensity focused ultrasound partial ablation.

Authors:  James E Thompson; Ashwin N Sridhar; Greg Shaw; Prabhakar Rajan; Anna Mohammed; Timothy P Briggs; Senthil Nathan; John D Kelly; Prasanna Sooriakumaran
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 2.264

Review 5.  Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer - Current status.

Authors:  Shrikanth Atluri; Ali Mouzannar; Vivek Venkatramani; Dipen J Parekh; Bruno Nahar
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2022-01-01

6.  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

7.  Salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy following focal ablation with irreversible electroporation: feasibility, oncological and functional outcomes.

Authors:  Alexandar Blazevski; William Gondoputro; Matthijs J Scheltema; Amer Amin; Bart Geboers; Daniela Barreto; Anne-Maree Haynes; Ron Shnier; Warick Delprado; Shikha Agrawal; James E Thompson; Phillip D Stricker
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2022-03-02       Impact factor: 2.264

8.  Triggers and oncologic outcome of salvage radical prostatectomy, salvage radiotherapy and active surveillance after focal therapy of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Jost von Hardenberg; Hannes Cash; Daniel Koch; Angelika Borkowetz; Johannes Bruendl; Sami-Ramzi Leyh-Bannurah; Timur H Kuru; Karl-Friedrich Kowalewski; Daniel Schindele; Katharina S Mala; Niklas Westhoff; Andreas Blana; Martin Schostak
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-04-21       Impact factor: 4.226

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.