Quality of Life After Open Radical Prostatectomy Compared with Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy

被引:38
|
作者
Wallerstedt, Anna [1 ]
Nyberg, Tommy [1 ,2 ]
Carlsson, Stefan [1 ]
Thorsteinsdottir, Thordis [3 ]
Stranne, Johan [4 ]
Tyritzis, Stavros I. [1 ]
Kollberg, Karin Stinesen [5 ]
Hugosson, Jonas [6 ]
Bjartell, Anders [7 ]
Wilderang, Ulrica [8 ]
Wiklund, Peter [1 ]
Steineck, Gunnar [8 ,9 ]
Haglind, Eva [10 ]
机构
[1] Karolinska Inst, Dept Mol Med & Surg, Sect Urol, Solnavagen 1, S-17177 Solna, Sweden
[2] Univ Cambridge, Ctr Canc Genet Epidemiol, Dept Publ Hlth & Primary Care, Cambridge, England
[3] Univ Iceland, Sch Hlth Sci, Fac Nursing, Reykjavik, Iceland
[4] Univ Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska Acad, Inst Clin Sci, Dept Urol, Gothenburg, Sweden
[5] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Jonsson Comprehens Canc Ctr, Fielding Sch Publ Hlth, UCLA Ctr Canc Prevent & Control Res CPCR, Los Angeles, CA USA
[6] Univ Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska Univ Hosp, Sahlgrenska Acad, Dept Urol,Inst Clin Sci, Gothenburg, Sweden
[7] Lund Univ, Skane Univ Hosp, Dept Urol, Lund, Sweden
[8] Univ Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska Acad, Inst Clin Sci, Div Clin Canc Epidemiol,Dept Oncol, Gothenburg, Sweden
[9] Karolinska Inst, Div Clin Canc Epidemiol, Dept Oncol & Pathol, Solna, Sweden
[10] Univ Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska Acad, Inst Clin Sci, Dept Surg, Gothenburg, Sweden
来源
EUROPEAN UROLOGY FOCUS | 2019年 / 5卷 / 03期
基金
瑞典研究理事会;
关键词
Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy; Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy; Quality of life; CANCER; MEN; INCONTINENCE; SATISFACTION; METAANALYSIS; CONTINENCE; BOTHER; RATES; STEP;
D O I
10.1016/j.euf.2017.12.010
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Surgery for prostate cancer has a large impact on quality of life (QoL). Objective: To evaluate predictors for the level of self-assessed QoL at 3 mo, 12 mo, and 24 mo after robot-assisted laparoscopic (RALP) and open radical prostatectomy (ORP). Design, setting, and participants: The LAParoscopic Prostatectomy Robot Open study, a prospective, controlled, nonrandomised trial of more than 4000 men who underwent radical prostatectomy at 14 centres. Here we report on QoL issues after RALP and ORP. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The primary outcome was self-assessed QoL preoperatively and at 3 mo, 12 mo, and 24 mo postoperatively. A direct validated question of self-assessed QoL on a seven-digit visual scale was used. Differences in QoL were analysed using logistic regression, with adjustment for confounders. Results and limitations: QoL did not differ between RALP and ORP postoperatively. Men undergoing ORP had a preoperatively significantly lower level of self-assessed QoL in a multivariable analysis compared with men undergoing RALP (odds ratio: 1.21, 95% confidence interval: 1.02-1.43), that disappeared when adjusted for preoperative preparedness for incontinence, erectile dysfunction, and certainty of being cured (odds ratio: 1.18, 95% confidence interval: 0.99-1.40). Incontinence and erectile dysfunction increased the risk for poor QoL at 3 mo, 12 mo, and 24 mo postoperatively. Biochemical recurrence did not affect QoL. A limitation of the study is the nonrandomised design. Conclusions: QoL at 3 mo, 12 mo, and 24 mo after RALP or ORP did not differ significantly between the two techniques. Poor QoL was associated with postoperative incontinence and erectile dysfunction but not with early cancer relapse, which was related to thoughts of death and waking up at night with worry. Patient summary: We did not find any difference in quality of life at 3 mo, 12 mo, and 24 mo when open and robot-assisted surgery for prostate cancer were compared. Postoperative incontinence and erectile dysfunction were associated with poor quality of life. (c) 2017 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:389 / 398
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Anatomic robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
    Joseph, J. V.
    Capello, S. A.
    Patel, H. P.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY SUPPLEMENTS, 2008, 7 (03) : 339 - 339
  • [32] The Case for Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
    Martinez-Salamanca, Juan I.
    Rao, Sandhya
    Ramanathan, Rajan
    Leung, Robert
    Mandhani, Anil
    Tewari, Ashutosh
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2008, 22 (09) : 2039 - 2043
  • [33] EVOLUTION OF ROBOT-ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY
    Orvieto, M. A.
    Patel, V. R.
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2009, 98 (02) : 76 - 88
  • [34] Salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
    Abdul-Muhsin, Haidar
    Samavedi, Srinivas
    Pereira, Claudio
    Palmer, Kenneth
    Patel, Vipul
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2013, 111 (04) : 686 - 687
  • [35] Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
    Rotering, J.
    Siemer, S.
    Stoeckle, M.
    UROLOGE, 2008, 47 (04): : 420 - +
  • [36] Potency outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
    Tissot, Sophie J.
    Costello, Anthony J.
    NATURE REVIEWS UROLOGY, 2022, 19 (04) : 195 - 196
  • [37] Outcomes after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
    Murphy, Declan G.
    Challacombe, Benjamin J.
    Costello, Anthony J.
    ASIAN JOURNAL OF ANDROLOGY, 2009, 11 (01) : 94 - 99
  • [38] Is a cystogram necessary after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy?
    Guru, Khurshid A.
    Seereiter, Phillip J.
    Sfakianos, John P.
    Hutson, Alan D.
    Mohler, James L.
    UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY-SEMINARS AND ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2007, 25 (06) : 465 - 467
  • [39] Potency outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
    Sophie J. Tissot
    Anthony J. Costello
    Nature Reviews Urology, 2022, 19 : 195 - 196
  • [40] Climacturia after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
    Parra Lopez, Maria Loreto
    Lozano Blasco, Jose Maria
    Osman Garcia, Ignacio
    Congregado Ruiz, Belen
    Conde Sanchez, Jose Manuel
    Medina Lopez, Rafael Antonio
    REVISTA INTERNACIONAL DE ANDROLOGIA, 2021, 19 (01): : 49 - 52