Risk of positive margins and biochemical recurrence in relation to nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy

被引:72
|
作者
Sofer, M
Hamilton-Nelson, KL
Schlesselman, JJ
Soloway, MS
机构
[1] Univ Miami, Dept Urol, Miami, FL 33101 USA
[2] Sylvester Comprehens Canc Ctr, Div Biostat, Miami, FL USA
关键词
D O I
10.1200/JCO.2002.07.069
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose : To assess the effect of nerve-sparing (NS) radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) on surgical margins and biochemical recurrence. Patients and Methods: Location and incidence of positive surgical margins, recurrence, and time to recurrence were assessed in a consecutive series of 734 men who underwent RRP for localized prostate cancer from 1992 through February 2000. NS procedures were used in 33% (n = 240) of 734 patients studied. Results: Surgical margins were positive for 24% (n = 58) and 31% (n = 152) of NS and non-NS patients, respectively (P = .06). No significant difference between the groups was found in location of positive margins (P = .92). Prostate-specific antigen level greater than 10 ng/mL, extraprostatic extension, tumor volume more than 20%, capsular penetration, Gleason score greater than or equal to 7, positive margins, and seminal vesicle invasion were associated with significantly increased risk of recurrence. However, NS patients were not at increased risk of recurrence compared with non-NS patients (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.53 to 1.72). The cumulative risk of recurrence within 3 and 5 years of surgery in NS patients was 9.7% and 14.4%, respectively, as compared with 17.1% and 21.1% for non-NS patients. Conclusion: in patients with localized prostate cancer, neither margin status nor biochemical-free survival within 5 years of surgery were altered by the nerve preservation technique. Given our experience, we recommend preservation of neurovascular bundles in these patients whenever the procedure is technically feasible.
引用
收藏
页码:1853 / 1858
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Nerve-sparing open radical retropublic prostatectomy
    Kessler, Thomas M.
    Burkhard, Fiona C.
    Studer, Urs E.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2007, 51 (01) : 90 - 97
  • [32] CONTINENCE FOLLOWING NERVE-SPARING RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY
    ODONNELL, PD
    FINAN, BF
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1989, 142 (05): : 1227 - 1229
  • [33] PROSTATE CANCER Nerve-sparing surgery and risk of positive surgical margins
    Boehm, Katharine
    Graefen, Markus
    NATURE REVIEWS UROLOGY, 2015, 12 (03) : 131 - 132
  • [35] Risk factors associated with positive surgical margins following radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: Can nerve-sparing surgery increase the risk?
    Roder, Martin Andreas
    Thomsen, Frederik Birkebaek
    Christensen, Ib Jarle
    Toft, Birgitte Gronkaer
    Brasso, Klaus
    Vainer, Ben
    Iversen, Peter
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2014, 48 (01) : 15 - 20
  • [36] IMPACT OF POSITIVE SURGICAL MARGIN AND NERVE-SPARING STATUS ON BIOCHEMICAL RECURRENCE IN PATIENTS WITH PROSTATE CANCER TREATED WITH RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: A MULTICENTER RETROSPECTIVE STUDY
    Narita, Shintaro
    Matsuda, Yoshinori
    Koizumi, Atsushi
    Okubo, Teppei
    Mitsuzuka, Koji
    Hatakeyama, Shingo
    Koie, Takuya
    Kawamura, Sadafumi
    Tochigi, Tatsuo
    Ohyama, Chikara
    Arai, Yoichi
    Habuchi, Tomonori
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 201 (04): : E741 - E741
  • [37] Novel anatomical identification of nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: fascial-sparing radical prostatectomy
    Huri, Emre
    PROSTATE INTERNATIONAL, 2014, 2 (01) : 1 - 7
  • [38] NERVE-SPARING PROSTATECTOMY
    MOORE, S
    KUHRIK, M
    SHEA, L
    KUHRIK, N
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NURSING, 1992, 92 (04) : 59 - 64
  • [39] DOPPLER-ASSISTED NERVE-SPARING RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY
    DREW, JB
    BEGUN, FP
    JACOBS, SC
    UROLOGY, 1989, 33 (03) : 228 - 229
  • [40] Nerve-sparing open radical prostatectomy with extracapsular dissection
    Barre, C.
    Thoulouzan, M.
    PROGRES EN UROLOGIE, 2009, 19 : S175 - S177