PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Radical prostatectomy”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 145 records · Page 8Linked to original sources
PubMed2004

Current and future strategies for preventing and managing erectile dysfunction following radical prostatectomy.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: As radical prostatectomy remains a commonly used procedure in the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer, we critically analyzed current and future strategies for preventing and managing postoperative erectile dysfunction. METHODS: Systematic literature review using Medline and CancerLit from January 1997 to June 2003. Abstracts published in the journals European Urology, The Journal of Urology and the International Journal of Impotence Research as official proceedings of internationally known scientific societies held in the same time period were also assessed. RESULTS: Patient selection and surgical technique are the major determinants of postoperative erectile function. Apoptosis of corporeal smooth muscle cells plays a role in the development of cavernous veno-occlusive dysfunction following radical prostatectomy. Pharmacological prophylaxis and treatment of postoperative erectile dysfunction is effective and safe. The concepts of cavernous nerve reconstruction and neuroprotection have been associated to promising results. CONCLUSIONS: In the hands of experienced surgeons, properly selected patients undergoing a nerve sparing radical prostatectomy should achieve unassisted or medically assisted erections postoperatively.

Erectile Dysfunction↗
PubMed1991

Adjuvant radiation therapy in patients with detectable prostate specific antigen following radical prostatectomy.

Adjuvant radiation therapy following radical prostatectomy for adenocarcinoma of the prostate was given to 25 patients. Of these patients 8 had microscopic lymph node metastasis, 8 had seminal vesicle invasion without positive lymph nodes, 6 had positive surgical margins and 3 had only capsule penetration. Their only evidence of residual disease was detectable serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) by the Yang assay. A total of 15 patients (60%) had a subsequent decrease in PSA to less than 0.3 ng./ml. and an additional 5 (20%) had a decrease in PSA by more than 50%. Currently 8 patients have no detectable PSA after a median followup of 18 months (17 to 38 months) since initiating radiation therapy. Only 1 of 12 patients with detectable PSA immediately after radical prostatectomy has had a durable response to adjuvant radiation therapy. In contrast 7 of 13 patients with a delayed increase in PSA had a durable response. The ability of adjuvant radiation therapy to eliminate serum PSA in patients with a delayed increase in PSA after radical prostatectomy is encouraging. However, longer followup, including the use of nonradiated control subjects, is needed to assess the ability of adjuvant radiation therapy to control local disease and prolong patient survival.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2002

Clinical utility of indium 111-capromab pendetide immunoscintigraphy in the detection of early, recurrent prostate carcinoma after radical prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Despite the ability of radical prostatectomy to eradicate prostate carcinoma, biochemical evidence of recurrent prostate carcinoma may be seen in approximately 40% of patients 15 years after they undergo surgery. Localization of recurrent disease after radical prostatectomy is difficult and may greatly influence subsequent clinical management. The authors examined the utility of indium 111 ((111)In)-capromab pendetide immunoscintigraphy to detect recurrent prostate carcinoma radiographically in men with early biochemical evidence of failure (serum prostate specific antigen [PSA] < or = 4.0 ng/mL) and assessed the minimum serum PSA level necessary for imaging recurrent disease. METHODS: Between May 1987 and August 1995, 255 hormone-naïve men with a mean (+/- standard deviation) age of 65 years +/- 7 years who underwent radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate carcinoma were followed without adjuvant therapy until early PSA recurrence in this multicenter study. Preoperatively, all patients had negative bone scans and pathologically negative lymph nodes, and they did not undergo hormonal ablation, chemotherapy, or radiation therapy preoperatively or postoperatively until the (111)In-capromab pendetide scan was performed. All men in this study had postoperative serum PSA levels < or = 4.0 ng/mL at the time of radionuclide imaging. All men underwent imaging with the capromab pendetide scan to localize recurrent disease, and charts were reviewed to document clinical evidence of recurrence. RESULTS: Pathologic findings included mean Gleason scores of 6.7 +/- 1.2; pathologic tumors classified as pT2a (18%), pT2b (26%), pT3a (38%), pT3b (16%), and pT4a (2%); a pathologic lymph node status of pN0 (100%); positive surgical margins (44%); and perineural invasion (42%). Capromab pendetide uptake was seen in 72% of 255 men throughout a range of patients' postoperative serum PSA levels (0.1-4.0 ng/mL), with 31% of men having local uptake (prostatic fossa) only. Of 151 men who underwent additional imaging studies, 16 of 139 men (12%) and 15 of 92 men (16%) showed evidence of recurrent disease by bone scintigraphy and computed tomography scans, respectively. Gleason score, pathologic stage, perineural invasion, and margin status were not correlated significantly with the (111)In-capromab pendetide scan. CONCLUSIONS: Capromab pendetide imaging can localize early PSA recurrence and may guide appropriate treatment after patients undergo radical prostatectomy. No minimum serum PSA value was needed to potentially detect radiographic disease after surgery. Further confirmatory studies and long-term follow-up of this cohort documenting response to salvage therapy are needed to validate these imaging findings.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Percent carcinoma in prostatectomy specimen is associated with risk of recurrence after radical prostatectomy in patients with pathologically organ confined prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: We evaluated tumor size, measured as the percent of the prostate involved by cancer, as a predictor of tumor recurrence after radical prostatectomy in patients with pathologically organ confined prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One of us (WJC) performed radical retropubic prostatectomy in 1,850 men who had pathologically organ confined prostate cancer with tumor size recorded between January 1988 and February 2003. The percent of prostate tissue involved by carcinoma in the radical prostatectomy specimen was estimated by visual inspection. We compared clinicopathological characteristics in patients who did and did not have tumor recurrence and stratified them by percent of tumor in the prostatectomy specimen. We also evaluated the relationship between percent of cancer and biochemical evidence of cancer recurrence. RESULTS: Patients who had recurrence were slightly older (mean age 62 vs 60 years, p = 0.004), and had higher mean preoperative prostate specific antigen (8.6 vs 6.3 ng/ml, p <0.0001) and a higher proportion of poorly differentiated tumors (Gleason grades 8 to 10) (7% vs 1%, p = 0.001). The mean percent of cancer was higher in men with recurrence (11% vs 7%, p <0.0001). Men with 10% or greater of the gland involved by cancer had a 10% recurrence rate compared with a 5% rate in men in whom cancer involved less than 10% of the gland (p = 0.001). The 5-year recurrence-free survival rate was 94%, 91% and 82% in patients with less than 10%, 10% to 20% and greater than 20% of the gland involved. The multivariate Cox model indicated that the percent of cancer involvement of the prostate provides unique predictive information about the risk of cancer recurrence (p = 0.0001). The estimated 5-year recurrence-free survival rate based on the Cox model indicated that patients with greater than 20% of the gland involved by tumor, clinical stage T2/T3 and Gleason sum >/=7 were at substantial risk of cancer recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Tumor size measured as the percent of cancer is an independent predictor of cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy in patients with pathologically organ confined prostate cancer.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Climacturia following radical prostatectomy: prevalence and risk factors.

PURPOSE: Following radical prostatectomy urine leakage during orgasm is a poorly defined entity. We defined the prevalence, quantity, bother and coping mechanisms associated with this complication, called climacturia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A self-administered questionnaire was given to a cohort of sexually active men after radical prostatectomy. We inquired about the frequency, quantity, bother and coping mechanisms associated with climacturia. We also recorded uroflowmetry and an American Urological Association symptom score (International Prostate Symptom Score) in each patient. RESULTS: Of the 42 patients enrolled with a mean age of 58.9 years and average time since radical prostatectomy of 23.6 months climacturia was reported in 19 (45%). Of the men 68% reported that it happened rarely or only occasionally, while 21% reported that it occurred most of the time or always. In terms of urine quantity 58% of respondents reported only a few drops but 16% reported a loss of more than 1 ounce. Of the patients 52% percent reported no or minimal bother but 48% reported that climacturia caused significant bother. Only 21% of respondents thought that it was of significant bother to their partners. Of the respondents 84% emptied the bladder before intercourse and 11% used condoms. Age, Gleason score and time since surgery were not predictors of climacturia. No association between peak urine flow on uroflowmetry or International Prostate Symptom Score and climacturia was found. CONCLUSIONS: Climacturia is a common clinical entity, occurring in almost half of all patients after radical prostatectomy. It can be a significant problem with respect to urine volume loss, associated bother and condom use. Patients must be informed about this complication before undergoing radical prostatectomy.

Adaptation, Psychological↗
PubMed2005

Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the learning curve.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is now an accepted treatment option for the management of localized prostate cancer. Numerous studies have demonstrated the feasibility and the reproducibility of this procedure. Expert teams in high-volume centres routinely carry out laparoscopic radical prostatectomy but for the novice the obstacle to success is how to learn and gain proficiency in this procedure. In this review, we will present our views on how this can be done. RECENT FINDINGS: A learning curve includes the necessity for continuous self-evaluation in terms of cancer control, continence and potency. Many different methods can be used to acquire the technique: dry lab, animal live lab, cadaveric laparoscopic dissection or mentoring with an expert. All of these steps may not be essential as laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is not too dissimilar to open prostatectomy. However, one must understand that the physiological consequences of anaesthesia during laparoscopy and basic laparoscopic suturing technique should be perfected prior to taking on laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The training then must continue under the supervision of a mentor. The opportunity for discussion with an expert allows the novice to learn the pitfalls and the tips and tricks of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, thus reducing the length of the learning curve and negating the need to reinvent the wheel. SUMMARY: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is similar to any other new surgical procedure and as with open surgery we learn and gain experience with each procedure; the learning curve is never completely finished.

Animals↗
PubMed1996

Radical prostatectomy: lower rates among African-American men.

This study compares radical prostatectomy rates by race among male Medicare patients in New York. A retrospective analysis was conducted of all radical prostatectomies performed on hospitalized male Medicare beneficiaries for the period 1991 through 1993. Basic trend data also were analyzed for 1990. Pattern analysis was conducted on the 4154 procedures performed between 1990 and 1993. The rate of radical prostatectomy rose dramatically during the 3-year period from 1990 to 1992 among New York's 1.1 million male Medicare beneficiaries. The rates rose for both African Americans and whites. However, the annual rates of radical prostatectomy for African Americans were significantly below those for whites. Lower rates of radical prostatectomies were observed for African Americans in all age groups except the < 65-year-old group. However, the total number of radical prostatectomies in this age group were small in number. An important finding was the lower annual rates of radical prostatectomy for African Americans in the 65- to 69-year-old age group. During the period under study, prostate cancer among Medicare patients in New York rose by 33.8% for African Americans and 26.5% for whites. Significantly, local disease was found at the time of diagnosis in 70% of whites but in only 55% of African Americans. These data reflect later stage at diagnosis among African-American males. These results indicate that despite higher national rates for prostate cancer, male African-American Medicare patients in New York have reduced access to radical prostatectomy as a treatment modality. This is especially of importance in the < 70-year-old group in whom most authorities consider the procedure appropriate. The reasons for this reduced access are discussed as are the measures needed to remedy the underlying inequities in health care.

Black or African American↗
PubMed2005

Preoperative prediction of small volume cancer (less than 0.5 ml) in radical prostatectomy specimens.

PURPOSE: The detection of low volume and early stage prostate cancer has increased with the widespread use of prostate specific antigen screening for prostatic adenocarcinoma. This increased detection has led to efforts to stratify patient risk and the potential benefits of various treatments based on preoperative clinical and biopsy data. We examined various clinical parameters and prostate biopsy features to determine which variables are most predictive of small volume (less than 0.5 ml) cancer at prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied 336 patients who underwent prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Radical prostatectomy specimens were completely embedded and whole mounted. Final tumor volume in the radical prostatectomy specimens was determined by the grid method. Clinical data were gathered by a review of patient charts. Various preoperative clinical and biopsy findings were analyzed to determine factors predictive of small volume cancer at prostatectomy. RESULTS: A total of 55 patients (16%) were found to have small volume cancer (less than 0.5 ml). On univariate logistic regression certain variables were significant predictors of small volume cancer, namely the highest Gleason score from all positive biopsy sites (p = 0.001), the Gleason score from the biopsy site with the highest percent of adenocarcinoma (p = 0.006), the highest percent of adenocarcinoma at any biopsy site (p <0.0001), the percent of adenocarcinoma at the biopsy site with the highest Gleason score (p <0.0001), the highest percent of cores positive for adenocarcinoma at any biopsy site (p = 0.001), the percent of cores with carcinoma at the site with the highest Gleason score (p = 0.002), the number of positive sites (p <0.0001) and tumor bilaterality (p <0.0001). None of the clinical parameters that we studied, including preoperative prostate specific antigen (p = 0.52), clinical stage (p = 0.62) or patient age (p = 0.94), was predictive of small volume cancer. On multivariate analysis the highest percent of adenocarcinoma at any site (adjusted OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.92 to 0.97, p <0.0001) and the number of positive biopsy sites (adjusted OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.96 to 0.99, p <0.0001) were significant predictors of small volume cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The number of positive biopsy sites and the highest percent of adenocarcinoma at any biopsy site are significant predictors of small volume cancer in radical prostatectomy specimens.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed1998

Epidemiological trends and financial outcomes in radical prostatectomy among Medicare beneficiaries, 1991 to 1993.

PURPOSE: We define epidemiological trends in radical prostatectomy among Medicare beneficiaries in the United States, describe related financial reimbursement to hospitals and physicians, and determine how many men received adjuvant therapy with androgen ablation or pelvic irradiation from 1991 to 1993. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined radical prostatectomy claims from a national 5% simple random sample (688,000 men) of 1991, 1992 and 1993 data on Medicare beneficiaries from the Health Care Financing Administration. We determined rates of radical prostatectomies among patients stratified by age, race and geographical region, and measured the fraction of men who had claims submitted for postoperative therapies for prostate cancer. We also collected financial information for Medicare parts A and B to estimate federal government economic burden from radical prostatectomy in this population. RESULTS: Among the 5,016 patients identified with Medicare claims for radical prostatectomy during 1991 to 1993 the rate peaked at 284/100,000 men in 1992 before declining the next year. For the youngest Medicare beneficiaries the rate increased 233% from 1991 to 1992 and 156% from 1992 to 1993. White men had a higher rate than nonwhite men in all 3 years but only in nonwhite men did the rate continue to rise during the study period. Geographical variations greater than 2-fold were noted. Total Medicare expenditures for radical prostatectomy were $194.2 million in 1991, $277.8 million in 1992 and $230.8 million in 1993. During 1991 to 1993 hospitals received more than three-fourths of total Medicare payments for radical prostatectomy, while physicians received less than one-fourth. More than 23% of men undergoing radical prostatectomy received subsequent therapy with gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists, bilateral orchiectomy and/or pelvic irradiation within 3 years of radical prostatectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Radical prostatectomy represents a significant burden on the federal health care dollar and does not appear to be as definitively curative as expected.

Age Factors↗
PubMed2005

Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: conventional and robotic.

By 2015, prostate cancer will become the most commonly diagnosed cancer in men. Radical prostatectomy reduces disease-specific mortality in patients with localized prostate cancer; however, the invasiveness of surgery and its resultant side effects cause many men to seek other treatments. In 2000, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy emerged as a minimally invasive alternative to open surgery; it has been refined recently by the addition of robotic technology. To examine the outcomes of robotic radical prostatectomy and compare them with those from open and conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, we prospectively collected baseline demographic data on all patients undergoing surgery for prostate cancer over a 4-year period at our center. Urinary function and sexual function were evaluated using standardized criteria as well as a questionnaire preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 18 months after their procedure. Operative and postoperative outcomes were compared using values for open radical prostatectomy as the reference standard. A total of 100 men underwent open radical prostatectomy with conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (n = 50) and robotic radical prostatectomy (n = 500). The odds ratios for operative times, blood loss, postoperative pain, complications, and median times to urinary continence and resumption of sexual activity all were lower for robotic than for open or laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. It appears safe to conclude that conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is a reasonable alternative to open radical prostatectomy in the surgical treatment of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. The incorporation of robotics may result in even better surgical outcomes than conventional laparoscopy. However, the surgical robot is expensive; few centers have access to the technology and even fewer have expertise in the technique. For robotic radical prostatectomy to become the standard of care for the treatment of localized prostate cancer will require economies of cost, dissemination of surgical expertise, and data from randomized trials.

Humans↗
PubMed2003

Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy: initial experience after 70 procedures.

PURPOSE: After our initial experience with 70 transperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomies we developed a totally extraperitoneal retropubic approach to radical prostatectomy using laparoscopic instruments. We report our initial experience with 70 endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 70 patients underwent endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy. Mean patient age was 63.4 years (range 49 to 76). Mean preoperative prostate specific antigen was 12.48 ng./ml. (range 1.4 to 50.7). There were no specific selection criteria for the procedure. The steps of the procedure are preparation of the preperitoneal space with the help of a balloon trocar, trocar placement (a 3 x 5 and a 2 x 12 mm. port), pelvic lymph node dissection, exposure of the prostate and the bladder neck, incision of the endopelvic fascia, ligation of Santorini's plexus, bladder neck dissection, mobilization of the seminal vesicles, incision of Denonvilliers' fascia, sectioning of the prostatic pedicles with or without preservation of the neurovascular bundles, dissection of Santorini's plexus and apex, urethrovesical anastomosis with 7 to 9 interrupted sutures and removal of the specimen via an extraction bag. During the 70 endoscopic prostatectomies 11 hernia defects were treated in 9 patients concomitantly. RESULTS: There was no conversions and no re-interventions. Mean operative time was 155 minutes (range 90 to 260). One patient required transfusion with 2 units of blood cells. Pathological stage was pT2a in 19 patients, pT2b in 14, pT3a in 25, pT3b in 9 and pT4 in 3. Positive surgical margins were found in 2 of the 33 patients (6.1%) with pT2 tumors and in 13 of the 37 (35.1%) with pT3 and pT4 tumors. Postoperatively edema and hematoma of the penis in 10 cases was treated conservatively. Furthermore, 4 patients had asymptomatic lymphoceles, 1 required lymphocele drainage and 2 had partial obturator nerve paralysis, which resolved spontaneously. In 1 patient deep venous thrombosis developed. CONCLUSIONS: The preliminary results of this series are promising. Operative and perioperative morbidity was low. Functional results and oncological control were similar to the results of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The data demonstrate that endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy can be performed with efficacy and results equal to those of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, while providing the benefits of a totally extraperitoneal approach. Therefore, totally endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy represents a technical improvement of laparoscopic technique because it completely obviates intra-abdominal complications and combines the advantages of minimally invasive laparoscopy and the retropubic open approach.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Prostate cancers scored as Gleason 6 on prostate biopsy are frequently Gleason 7 tumors at radical prostatectomy: implication on outcome.

PURPOSE: Differentiation between Gleason score 6 and 7 in prostate biopsy is important for treatment decision making. Nevertheless, under grading errors compared with the actual pathological grade at radical prostatectomy are common. We compared the characteristics and outcomes of tumors that were scored 6 on prostate biopsy but were 7 on subsequent radical prostatectomy pathological evaluation to those in tumors with a consistent rating of Gleason score 6 or 7 at biopsy and surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective database analysis from our referral center (1989 to 2004). We compared pre-prostatectomy characteristics, radical prostatectomy pathological features and the post-radical prostatectomy prostate specific antigen failure rate, defined as any 2 consecutive detectable prostate specific antigen measurements, in 3 subgroups of patients, including 156 with matched Gleason score 6 in the prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy, 205 with upgraded Gleason score 6/7, that is prostate biopsy Gleason score 6 and radical prostatectomy Gleason score 7, and 412 with matched Gleason score 7 in the prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy. RESULTS: Radical prostatectomy Gleason score matched the prostate biopsy score in 38.2% of biopsy Gleason score 6 and 81.4% of biopsy Gleason score 7 cases. Higher prostate specific antigen was associated and an increased percent of cancer in the prostate biopsy was predictive of discordance between the prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason scores (p <0.001). Margin (p = 0.0075) or seminal vesicle involvement (p = 0.0002), cancer volume (p <0.001) and the prostate specific antigen failures rate (p = 0.014) were significantly higher in under graded Gleason score 7 cancer compared to those in matched Gleason score 6 cases. However, they were comparable to those with a matched Gleason score 7 tumor grade (p = 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of tumors graded Gleason score 6 at biopsy are Gleason score 7 at surgery. Upgraded Gleason score 6 to 7 tumors have outcomes similar to those of genuine Gleason score 7 cancer. For prostate biopsy Gleason score 6 tumors clinicians should consider the overall likelihood of tumor upgrading as well as specific patient characteristics, such as prostate specific antigen and the percent of tumor in the prostate biopsy, when contemplating treatments that are optimized for low grade tumors, including watchful waiting or brachytherapy.

Biopsy↗
PubMed2006

Externalized urachal suture: novel approach to bowel and bladder retraction during transperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Although laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) has emerged as a legitimate minimally invasive surgical alternative to open radical retropubic prostatectomy, the technical difficulty of this advanced laparoscopic procedure remains an obstacle to its widespread use. We report a novel surgical technique for the purpose of bowel and bladder retraction during transperitoneal LRP that improves visualization and negates the need for additional working ports or steep Trendelenburg positioning. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS: A 35-cm absorbable suture is secured intracorporeally to the urachus. The distal end of the suture is then pulled out through the left subcostal abdominal wall in the midaxillary line using a Carter-Thomason CloseSure device. Application of tension on the suture retracts the bladder superiorly and prevents bowel from entering the surgical field. This maneuver provides excellent exposure of the bladder neck and prostate and minimizes the need for additional fan retraction or steep Trendelenburg positioning. In 20 consecutive procedures, this step added an average of 2.2 minutes to the operative time, which averaged 169 minutes overall. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporation of an adjustable externalized urachal suture allows for excellent retraction of both bowel and bladder. This allows transperitoneal LRP to be performed using a four-port approach with minimal need for additional retraction or steep Trendelenburg positioning. In light of these benefits, the urachal suture has been incorporated as a routine step in transperitoneal LRP at our institution.

Humans↗
PubMed2000

Needle biopsy of recurrent adenocarcinoma of the prostate after radical prostatectomy.

The objective of this study was to evaluate needle biopsy of recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. We evaluated 37 cases of recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy that were diagnosed by needle biopsy between March 1984 and July 1998. Fifteen were from consultations in which contributors were uncertain of the diagnosis, and 22 were from men who had come to The Johns Hopkins Hospital for treatment. The median interval from radical prostatectomy to biopsy showing recurrent tumor was 40 months. There was no correlation between the interval to recurrence and either pathologic features of the biopsy and radical prostatectomy or various clinical features. The mean extent of adenocarcinoma in the biopsies was 3.2 mm (range, 0.1 to 18 mm; median, 2 mm). The length of recurrent cancer on biopsy correlated with an abnormal rectal examination (P = .001). The mean Gleason score for the recurrent tumors was 6.5, which correlated with the grade of the radical prostatectomy cancer (P = .005). The cancers often lacked overt histologic features of malignancy. Benign prostatic acini were seen in five cases (14%), usually separate from the cancer. In 5 (33%) of the consultation cases, we would not have been able to diagnose cancer if not for the fact that atypical prostate glands should not be present after radical prostatectomy. In well-sampled radical prostatectomies, margins were almost always positive, as was extraprostatic extension. In cases with less sampling, there was a higher incidence of organ-confined disease and margin-negative disease implying suboptimal processing of the radical prostatectomy. After radical prostatectomy, recurrent cancer on needle biopsies may be focal and difficult to diagnose and must be assessed differently than in patients who have not had surgery.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed1997

[Radical retropubic prostatectomy].

Radical prostatectomy may cure most patients in whom the malignant tumor has not invaded through the prostatic capsule. Advances in surgical technique and accumulation of experience have decreased the complication rate significantly. Long-term results of surgical treatment are now better than those of other forms of treatment; hence radical prostatectomy is now recommended for men with life expectancies longer than 10 years. Between 1988 and 1995, 164 men with clinical stages T1 or T2 adenocarcinoma were admitted for radical prostatectomy. Most were not offered a nerve-sparing procedure, so as to allow wider, more complete resection. Those who wanted preservation of sexual function underwent the nerve- preserving procedure. In 6 patients operation was discontinued when metastases to the mac lymph nodes were detected and in 1 when invasion of the pelvic wall was found, 157 underwent radical prostatectomy. Preoperative biopsy revealed a low-grade lesion (Gleason 2-4) in 19.1%, intermediate grade (Gleason 5-6) in 61.8% and high-grade (Gleason 7-9) in 19.1%; however, pathologic grading revealed that only 7.0% had grade 2-4 tumor, 60.5% grade 5-6 and 32.5% grade 7-9. Pathologic staging revealed T2 tumor in 58%, T3 in 38.8% (including microscopic invasion of the capsule or seminal vesicles); microscopic lymph node metastases were found in 3.2%. Tumor invasion through the capsule was found in only 2 of 13 treated with neoadjuvant androgen blockade, compared with 40% in those who did not receive this treatment. There was no operative mortality and only 14.7% has complications. All had urinary incontinence immediately after operation, but regained continence after an average of 4-5 months, 24 were incontinent for more than 12 months, but most of them had only mild stress incontinence. Most patients were impotent after the procedure. There was tumor recurrence, diagnosed by rise in serum PSA, in 26 during an average followup of 26.4 months (range 3-93). Cure rate of prostatic cancer by radical prostatectomy may be increased by improved preoperative staging methods and better patient selection; long term follow up is required for determining cure rate.

Aged↗
PubMed1998

Anatomic radical prostatectomy: evolution of the surgical technique.

PURPOSE: Although radical prostatectomy provided excellent cancer control, it never gained widespread popularity because of the major side effects of incontinence, impotence and excessive blood loss. The reason for this morbidity was a deficit in the understanding of the periprostatic anatomy. The evolution of the surgical technique for anatomic radical prostatectomy is described. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Beginning in 1974 anatomic observations in the operating room were used to clarify the anatomy of the dorsal vein complex, pelvic plexus, striated urethral sphincter and lateral pelvic fascia. These intraoperative observations were amplified using dissections in stillborns and step section whole mount adult cadaveric studies. RESULTS: Armed with improved information about the periprostatic anatomy, an anatomical approach to radical prostatectomy was developed. This surgical technique has improved surgical exposure, lowered blood loss, reduced urinary incontinence, made it possible to preserve potency and provided excellent cancer control. CONCLUSIONS: With the reduction in morbidity, radical prostatectomy today is an ideal treatment for the cure of prostate cancer in a patient who is curable and who is going to live long enough to need to be cured. Also the widespread application of radical prostatectomy has provided tissue and valuable pathological information that has galvanized research in the field.

Fascia↗
PubMed2002

A randomized trial comparing radical prostatectomy with watchful waiting in early prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Radical prostatectomy is widely used in the treatment of early prostate cancer. The possible survival benefit of this treatment, however, is unclear. We conducted a randomized trial to address this question. METHODS: From October 1989 through February 1999, 695 men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer in International Union against Cancer clinical stage T1b, T1c, or T2 were randomly assigned to watchful waiting or radical prostatectomy. We achieved complete follow-up through the year 2000 with blinded evaluation of causes of death. The primary end point was death due to prostate cancer, and the secondary end points were overall mortality, metastasis-free survival, and local progression. RESULTS: During a median of 6.2 years of follow-up, 62 men in the watchful-waiting group and 53 in the radical-prostatectomy group died (P=0.31). Death due to prostate cancer occurred in 31 of 348 of those assigned to watchful waiting (8.9 percent) and in 16 of 347 of those assigned to radical prostatectomy (4.6 percent) (relative hazard, 0.50; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.27 to 0.91; P=0.02). Death due to other causes occurred in 31 of 348 men in the watchful-waiting group (8.9 percent) and in 37 of 347 men in the radical-prostatectomy group (10.6 percent). The men assigned to surgery had a lower relative risk of distant metastases than the men assigned to watchful waiting (relative hazard, 0.63; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.96). CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial, radical prostatectomy significantly reduced disease-specific mortality, but there was no significant difference between surgery and watchful waiting in terms of overall survival.

Aged↗
PubMed1999

Molecular determination of surgical margins using fossa biopsies at radical prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: Status of the surgical margins after radical prostatectomy is a key factor for predicting postoperative outcome. Current methods used to determine margin status are tedious, costly and vary among institutions. Sensitive and inexpensive detection of prostate cells in the circulation of patients with prostate cancer has been achieved using reverse transcriptase (RT) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for prostate specific antigen and prostate specific membrane antigen. Therefore, we designed and tested a novel and objective molecular assay for assessing surgical margins at radical prostatectomy based on the detection of prostate specific markers using RT-PCR. We also compared this assay to standard pathological examination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 30 consecutive patients with local prostate cancer underwent radical prostatectomy. At the completion of gland excision 5 biopsies of the prostatic fossa were obtained for histopathological and molecular analysis. We performed RT-PCR analysis for prostate specific antigen and prostate specific membrane antigen messenger ribonucleic acid in these biopsy specimens, and compared the results with pathological stage. Men free of prostate cancer who underwent radical cystoprostatectomy for bladder cancer or abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer served as controls. RESULTS: There were positive molecular margins in all patients with positive margins and/or extracapsular extension. No controls had a positive molecular assay. In 4 of 16 patients (25%) histopathological evaluation revealed organ confined disease but biopsies were positive by the molecular assay, including those in 2 (50%) who had been treated with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy before surgery because of a higher estimated risk of extracapsular disease. Results in 4 cases were uninformative. CONCLUSIONS: Our results with an objective molecular assay aimed at assessing surgical margins after radical prostatectomy reveal an excellent correlation with conventional pathological analysis. In addition, molecular assessment of the prostatic fossa identifies patients in whom extracapsular disease may have been unidentified by conventional pathological examination. In addition, this assay yields clues to why neoadjuvant hormonal treatment before radical prostatectomy does not seem to decrease the biochemical failure rate in these patients. Larger studies with longer followup are required to determine the prognostic significance of these positive molecular margins.

Adenocarcinoma↗