...
首页> 外文期刊>BJU international >Extended vs standard lymph node dissection in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer: A propensity-score-matching analysis
【24h】

Extended vs standard lymph node dissection in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer: A propensity-score-matching analysis

机译:机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术对中危或高危前列腺癌患者的扩展淋巴结清扫与标准淋巴结清扫:倾向评分匹配分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Although lymph node dissection (LND) is known as the most accurate method of nodal staging, the therapeutic role of LND remains undetermined. This is mainly because of the lack of randomized prospective studies and the fact that retrospective analyses often result in bias and misinterpretation. To overcome the limitation of retrospective analysis, we matched preoperative variables using propensity scores and compared the outcomes between patients treated with robot-assisted eLND and sLND. In the matched cohort, robot-asssited eLND achieved an increased detection rate of lymph node metastases; however, the therapeutic benefit was not statistically significant between the two groups on short-term follow-up. Objective To compare the pathological and biochemical outcomes between extended lymph node dissection (eLND) and standard lymph node dissection (sLND) in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer. Patients and Methods A total of 905 patients underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and lymph node dissection (LND) by a single surgeon between June 2006 and January 2011. Of these, 170 patients who underwent robot-assisted eLND and 294 patients who underwent robot-assisted sLND for intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer were included in the study. Propensity-score matching was performed using the preoperative variables which included age, body mass index, prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, biopsy Gleason score 1 and 2, total number of biopsied cores, number of positive cores and prostate volumes. Pathological and biochemical outcomes were assessed according to the extent of LND. Results The median (range) follow-up period was 36 (12-77) months and the median number of lymph nodes removed was 21 and 12 in the eLND and sLND groups, respectively. Propensity-score matching resulted in 141 patients in each group. Although patients who underwent eLND had a higher clinical stage, biopsy Gleason score and number of positive cores than those treated with sLND in the entire cohort, there were no preoperative between-group differences in the matched cohort. In the matched cohort, lymph node metastases were detected at a significantly higher rate in the eLND than in the sLND group (12.1 vs. 5.0%, P = 0.033). In the matched cohort, the 3-year biochemical recurrence-free survival rates were 77.8 and 73.5% in the eLND and sLND groups, respectively, which was not significant (hazard ratio 0.85, P = 0.497). Conclusion Robot-assisted eLND achieved an increased lymph node yield and higher detection rate of lymph node metastases; however, robotic eLND did not alter biochemical outcomes in a short-term follow-up.
机译:关于这个主题有什么了解?该研究增加了什么?尽管淋巴结清扫术(LND)被认为是最准确的淋巴结分期方法,但LND的治疗作用仍未确定。这主要是由于缺乏随机的前瞻性研究,以及回顾性分析经常导致偏见和误解的事实。为了克服回顾性分析的局限性,我们使用倾向评分匹配术前变量,并比较了机器人辅助eLND和sLND治疗的患者的结局。在匹配的队列中,机器人辅助的eLND可以提高淋巴结转移的检测率。然而,在短期随访中,两组之间的治疗益处在统计学上并不显着。目的比较中度或高危前列腺癌机器人辅助行根治性前列腺切除术的患者扩大淋巴结清扫术(eLND)和标准淋巴结清扫术(sLND)的病理学和生化结果。患者和方法在2006年6月至2011年1月之间,共有905名患者由一名外科医生进行了机器人辅助的根治性前列腺切除术和淋巴结清扫术(LND)。其中,有170例接受了机器人辅助的eLND的患者和294例接受了机器人辅助的手术。研究中包括针对中危或高危前列腺癌的辅助sLND。使用术前变量进行倾向评分匹配,这些变量包括年龄,体重指数,前列腺特异性抗原,临床分期,活检格里森评分1和2,活检核心总数,阳性核心数目和前列腺体积。根据LND的程度评估病理和生化结果。结果eLND组和sLND组的中位(范围)随访期为36(12-77)个月,淋巴结清扫的中位数分别为21和12。倾向得分匹配导致每组141例患者。尽管在整个队列中接受eLND的患者的临床分期,活检Gleason评分和阳性核心数均高于sLND治疗的患者,但在匹配队列中,术前组间无差异。在匹配的队列中,在eLND中检测到的淋巴结转移率明显高于sLND组(12.1对5.0%,P = 0.033)。在配对队列中,eLND和sLND组的3年无生化复发生存率分别为77.8和73.5%,这并不显着(危险比0.85,P = 0.497)。结论机器人辅助的eLND可提高淋巴结产量,提高淋巴结转移检出率。但是,机器人eLND在短期随访中并未改变生化结果。

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