首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of Urology >Robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus radical retropubic prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: comparison of short-term biochemical recurrence-free survival.
【24h】

Robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus radical retropubic prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: comparison of short-term biochemical recurrence-free survival.

机译:机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺切除术与根治性耻骨后前列腺切除术在临床上局限性前列腺癌:短期无生化复发的生存率比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

PURPOSE: We compared biochemical recurrence-free survival of patients who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy vs robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy in concurrent series at a single institution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 2,132 patients were treated between June 2003 and January 2008. We excluded from study patients with prior treatment (115), missing data (83) and lymph node involvement (30). The remaining cohort (1,904) was compared based on clinical, surgical and pathological factors. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed comparing biochemical recurrence after robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy and radical retropubic prostatectomy. A Cox proportional hazards model was generated to determine whether surgical approach is an independent predictor of biochemical recurrence. RESULTS: There were 491 radical retropubic prostatectomies (25.9%) and 1,413 robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomies (74.1%) performed, and median followup was 10 months (IQR 2 to 23). On univariate analysis the robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy group was slightly lower risk with lower median prostate specific antigen (5.4 vs 5.8, p <0.01), a lower proportion of pathological grade 7-10 (48.5% vs 54.7%, p <0.01) and lower pathological stage (80.5% pT2 vs 69.6% pT2, p <0.01). The 3-year biochemical recurrence-free survival rate was similar between the robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy and radical retropubic prostatectomy groups on the whole as well as when stratified by pathological stage, grade and margin status. On multivariate analysis extracapsular extension (p <0.01), pathological grade 7 or greater (p <0.01) and positive surgical margin (p <0.01) were independent predictors of biochemical recurrence while surgical approach was not. CONCLUSIONS: The likelihood of biochemical recurrence was similar between groups when stratified by known risk factors of recurrence. Surgical approach was not a significant predictor of biochemical recurrence in the multivariate model. Our analysis is suggestive of comparable effectiveness for robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy, although longer term studies are needed.
机译:目的:我们比较了在单个机构同时进行根治性耻骨后前列腺切除术与机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺切除术的患者的无生化复发生存率。材料与方法:2003年6月至2008年1月,共治疗了2132例患者。我们排除了先前治疗(115),数据丢失(83)和淋巴结受累(30)的患者。根据临床,手术和病理因素比较了其余的队列(1,904)。进行了Kaplan-Meier分析,比较了机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺切除术和根治性耻骨后前列腺切除术后的生化复发率。生成了Cox比例风险模型,以确定手术方法是否是生化复发的独立预测因子。结果:共进行了491例根治性耻骨后前列腺切除术(占25.9%)和1,413例机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺切除术(占74.1%),中位随访时间为10个月(IQR 2至23)。在单因素分析中,机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺切除术组的风险稍低,中位前列腺特异性抗原较低(5.4 vs 5.8,p <0.01),病理等级为7-10的比例较低(48.5%vs 54.7%,p <0.01),较低的病理分期(80.5%pT2与69.6%pT2,p <0.01)。机器人辅助的腹腔镜前列腺切除术组和根治性耻骨后前列腺切除术组之间的3年生化无复发生存率在总体上以及按病理阶段,等级和边缘状态进行分层时均相似。在多变量分析中,囊外扩张(p <0.01),病理等级7或更高(p <0.01)和手术切缘阳性(p <0.01)是生化复发的独立预测因素,而手术方法则不是。结论:按已知的复发危险因素分层时,各组之间生化复发的可能性相似。在多变量模型中,手术方法不是生化复发的重要预测指标。我们的分析表明,尽管需要长期研究,但机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺切除术具有相当的疗效。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号