Bladder neck-sparing retropubic radical prostatectomy: assessing risk factors for detection of positive surgical margins

被引:0
|
作者
Belousov, I. I. [1 ]
Kogan, M. I. [1 ]
Tokhtamishyan, S. K. [1 ]
Chibichyan, M. B. [1 ]
机构
[1] Rostov State Med Univ, Minist Hlth Russia, 29 Nakhichevanskiy Pereulok, Rostov Na Donu 344022, Russia
来源
ONKOUROLOGIYA | 2022年 / 18卷 / 02期
关键词
prostate cancer; retropubic radical prostatectomy; positive surgical margin; RADIATION-THERAPY; CANCER; PRESERVATION; CONTINENCE;
D O I
10.17650/1726-9776-2022-18-2-88-101
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background. Bladder neck preservation during retropubic radical prostatectomy (rRP) promotes a protective effect on urinary continence compared to standard rRP. Aim. To assessment of possible predictors for positive surgical margin (PSM) recognition is an important step. Materials and methods. 136 patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa) were studied in the study. Group 1, 90 patients (retrospective assessment), underwent standard rRP, group 2, 46 patients (prospective assessment), underwent rRP modified by bladder neck preservation with a part of the proximal prostatic urethra. The clinical and pathological stages of PCa were assessed; the groups were compared to the parameter PSM. Statistical analysis was performed using nonparametric statistical methods. Results. Both groups were comparable in age and baseline total prostate specific antigen (PSA) but differed in prostate volume and Gleason score. Also, there were differences in clinical and pathological stages of PCa. PSM-patients had more aggressive PCa according to the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) and TNM classifications and had higher progression risk prognosis stages. In PSM-patients, correlations were determined between prostate volume and baseline Gleason index (r = 0.338; p >0.05); baseline total PSA and Gleason score before (r = 0.529; p >0.05) and after (r = 0.310; p >0.05) rRP, respectively. Nevertheless, the incidence of PSM among all subjects was 6.6 % of cases, while in groups 1 and 2 was 7.8 and 4.3 % of cases, respectively. In this way, surgical techniques that maximize bladder neck preservation with a part of proximal prostatic urethra have no significant effect on PSM. Ranges of total PSA, clinical stage of PCa, Gleason score and progression risk stages (prognostic group for PCa) were determined as predictors of PSM. Their use will make it possible to establish patient selection criteria for bladder neck preservation with proximal prostatic urethra during rRP. Conclusion. The identified predictors will allow determining during clinical staging minimal risks of detecting PSM. The rRP modified by bladder neck preservation with part of the proximal prostatic urethra does not increase the incidence of PSM compared to the standard rRP. The feasibility of this technique should be related to total PSA, clinical stage of PCa, Gleason score, and the progression risk stage.
引用
收藏
页码:88 / 101
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Bladder neck-sparing radical prostatectomy and positive margins
    Loughlin, KR
    Doyle, C
    [J]. UROLOGY, 2001, 58 (01) : 133 - 134
  • [2] Bladder neck-sparing radical prostatectomy and positive margins - Reply
    Sanda, M
    [J]. UROLOGY, 2001, 58 (01) : 134 - 134
  • [3] Bladder neck-sparing modification of radical prostatectomy adversely affects surgical margins in pathologic T3a prostate cancer
    Marcovich, R
    Wojno, KJ
    Wei, JT
    Rubin, MA
    Montie, JE
    Sanda, MG
    [J]. UROLOGY, 2000, 55 (06) : 904 - 908
  • [4] Systematic Review of Studies Reporting Positive Surgical Margins After Bladder Neck Sparing Radical Prostatectomy
    Mariangela Bellangino
    Clare Verrill
    Tom Leslie
    Richard W. Bell
    Freddie C. Hamdy
    Alastair D. Lamb
    [J]. Current Urology Reports, 2017, 18
  • [5] Systematic Review of Studies Reporting Positive Surgical Margins After Bladder Neck Sparing Radical Prostatectomy
    Bellangino, Mariangela
    Verrill, Clare
    Leslie, Tom
    Bell, Richard W.
    Hamdy, Freddie C.
    Lamb, Alastair D.
    [J]. CURRENT UROLOGY REPORTS, 2017, 18 (12)
  • [6] Decreased number of positive surgical margins in radical retropubic prostatectomy
    Braun, PM
    Meyer-Schell, K
    Seif, C
    Hautmann, S
    Leuschner, I
    Klöppel, G
    Jünemann, KP
    [J]. UROLOGE, 2005, 44 (11): : 1324 - 1331
  • [7] Risk adjusted analysis of positive surgical margins following laparoscopic and retropubic radical prostatectomy
    Touijer, K
    Kuroiwa, K
    Eastham, JA
    Vickers, AJ
    Reuter, VE
    Scardino, PT
    Guillonneau, B
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2006, 175 (04): : 366 - 366
  • [8] Surgical modifications of radical retropubic prostatectomy to decrease incidence of positive surgical margins
    Alsikafi, NF
    Brendler, CB
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1998, 159 (04): : 1281 - 1285
  • [9] Radical prostatectomy: Bladder neck preservation and puboprostatic ligament sparing - Effects on continence and positive margins
    Deliveliotis, C
    Protogerou, V
    Alargof, E
    Varkarakis, J
    [J]. UROLOGY, 2002, 60 (05) : 855 - 858
  • [10] Cold knife incision of anastomotic strictures following bladder neck-sparing radical prostatectomy
    Giannarini, Gianluca
    De Maria, Maunzio
    Morelli, Girolamo
    Manassero, Francesca
    Mogorovich, Andrea
    Selli, Cesare
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2007, 177 (04): : 333 - 333