Morbidity of salvage radical prostatectomy: limited impact of the minimally invasive approach

被引:4
|
作者
Perera, Marlon [1 ]
Vilaseca, Antoni [1 ,2 ]
Tin, Amy L. [3 ]
Nguyen, Daniel P. [1 ,4 ]
Corradi, Renato B. [1 ]
Touijer, Adam S. [1 ]
Martin-Malburet, Alexandre Godefroy [1 ,4 ]
Alvim, Ricardo [1 ]
Benfante, Nicole [3 ]
Sjoberg, Daniel D. [3 ]
Laudone, Vincent [1 ]
Scardino, Peter T. [1 ]
Eastham, James A. [1 ]
Touijer, Karim A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Surg, Urol Serv, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10065 USA
[2] Hosp Clin Barcelona, Urol Dept, Barcelona, Spain
[3] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, New York, NY 10021 USA
[4] Reseau Hosp Neuchatelois, Urol Dept, Neuchatel, Switzerland
关键词
Prostatic neoplasms; Prostatectomy; Salvage therapy; Minimally invasive surgical procedures; Postoperative complications; FUNCTIONAL OUTCOMES; CANCER; RADIATION; COMPLICATIONS;
D O I
10.1007/s00345-022-04031-1
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
Purpose We aimed to report the morbidity profile of salvage radical prostatectomy (SRP) after radiotherapy failure and assess the impact of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) on postoperative complications and functional outcomes. Materials and methods Between 1985 and 2019, a total of 293 patients underwent SRP; 232 underwent open SRP; and 61 underwent laparoscopic SRP with or without robotic assistance. Complications were recorded and classified into standardized categories per the Clavien-Dindo classification. Results Twenty-nine patients (10%) experienced grade 3 complications within 30 days, 22 (9.5%) after open and 7 (11%) after MIS (p = 0.6). Between 30 and 90 days after surgery, 7.3% of patients in the open group and 10% in the MIS group had grade 3 complications (p = 0.5). The most common complication was bladder neck contracture (BNC), representing 40% of the 30-90 day complications. Within one year of SRP, 81 patients (31%, 95% CI 25%, 37%) developed BNC; we saw non-significant lower rates in MIS (25 vs 32%; p = 0.4). Functional outcomes were poor after SRP and showed no difference between open and MIS groups for urinary continence (16 vs 18%, p = 0.7) and erectile function (7 vs 13%, p = 0.4). 5 year cancer-specific survival and overall survival was 95% and 88% for the entire cohort, respectively. Conclusions Our outcomes suggest poor functional recovery after SRP, regardless of the operative approach. Currently there is no evidence favoring the use of open or MIS approach. Further studies are required to ensure comparable outcomes between these approaches.
引用
收藏
页码:1637 / 1644
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Minimally invasive radical prostatectomy: Now safe and efficacious
    Costello, AJ
    ANZ JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2004, 74 (12) : 1038 - 1038
  • [22] IMPACT OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE APPROACH ON THE PROBABILITY OF EARLY COMPLETE FUNCTIONAL RECOVERY AFTER BILATERAL NERVE SPARING RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY
    Villa, Luca
    Suardi, Nazareno
    Gallina, Andrea
    Russo, Andrea
    Lughezzani, Giovanni
    Buffi, Niccolo
    Larcher, Alessandro
    Damiano, Rocco
    Cantiello, Francesco
    Lazzeri, Massimo
    Shariat, Shahrokh F.
    Guazzoni, Giorgio
    Montorsi, Francesco
    Briganti, Alberto
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2014, 191 (04): : E511 - E512
  • [23] Minimally Invasive Salvage Prostatectomy After Primary Radiation or Ablation Treatment
    Espinos, Estefania Linares
    Sanchez-Salas, Rafael
    Sivaraman, Arjun
    Perez-Reggeti, Jose I.
    Barret, Eric
    Rozet, Francois
    Galiano, Marc
    Prapotnich, Dominique
    Cathelineau, Xavier
    UROLOGY, 2016, 94 : 111 - 116
  • [24] Radical cystectomy: the minimally invasive approach
    Savage, SJ
    UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY-SEMINARS AND ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2004, 22 (03) : 262 - 263
  • [25] Salvage radical prostatectomy
    Hautmann, R. E.
    UROLOGE, 2006, 45 (10): : 1260 - 1265
  • [26] Salvage radical prostatectomy
    Heidenreich, A.
    Thueer, D.
    Pfister, D.
    PANMINERVA MEDICA, 2010, 52 (03) : 231 - 237
  • [27] Salvage radical prostatectomy
    Heidenreich, A
    Ohlmann, CH
    Polyakov, S
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY SUPPLEMENTS, 2005, 4 (04) : 47 - 52
  • [28] Salvage radical prostatectomy
    Shekarriz, B
    Upadhyay, J
    Pontes, JE
    UROLOGIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2001, 28 (03) : 545 - +
  • [29] Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Radical Prostatectomy-a Contemporary Review
    Bhat, Kulthe Ramesh Seetharam
    Raghunath, S. K.
    Srivatsa, N.
    Tejus, C.
    Vishruth, K.
    Kumar, R. Anil
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2020, 11 (04) : 580 - 588
  • [30] Comparative Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive vs Open Radical Prostatectomy
    Hu, Jim C.
    Gu, Xiangmei
    Lipsitz, Stuart R.
    Barry, Michael J.
    D'Amico, Anthony V.
    Weinberg, Aaron C.
    Keating, Nancy L.
    JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2009, 302 (14): : 1557 - 1564