首页> 外文期刊>European urology >The prognostic significance of capsular incision into tumor during radical prostatectomy.
【24h】

The prognostic significance of capsular incision into tumor during radical prostatectomy.

机译:前列腺癌根治术中包膜切开对肿瘤的预后意义。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: The prognostic significance of capsular incision (CapI) into tumor during radical prostatectomy (RP) with otherwise organ-confined disease remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of CapI into tumor on oncologic outcome. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective review of 8110 consecutive patients with prostate cancer treated at Ottawa Hospital and at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, both tertiary academic centers, between 1985 and 2008. INTERVENTION: All patients underwent an open, laparoscopic or robotic RP. MEASUREMENTS: Patients were divided into four pathologic categories: group 1 (CapI group), positive surgical margins (PSMs) without extraprostatic extension (EPE); group 2, negative surgical margins (NSMs) without EPE; group 3, NSM with EPE; group 4, PSMs with EPE. Estimates of recurrence-free survival were generated with the Kaplan-Meier method. Recurrence was defined as a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) >0.2 ng/ml and rising. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) for recurrence controlling for pretreatment PSA, RP date, RP Gleason sum, seminal vesicle invasion, and lymph node involvement. Pathologic categories were defined in the model by including the variables EPE and surgical margins (SMs) as well as their interaction. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Median follow-up was 37.3 mo. The 5-yr recurrence-free probability after RP for the CapI group was 77% (95% confidence interval [CI], 72-83). This was not only inferior to patients with NSMs and no EPE (log rank p<0.0001) but also to those with NSMs and EPE (log rank p=0.0002). In multivariate analysis the interaction between EPE and SM was not significant (p=0.26). In the adjusted model excluding the interaction term, patients with EPE had an increased risk for recurrence (HR: 1.80; 95% CI, 1.49-2.17; p<0.0001) as did those with positive margins (HR: 1.81; 95% CI, 1.51-2.15; p<0.0001). This was a retrospective study. CONCLUSIONS: CapI into tumor has a significant impact on patient outcome following RP. Patients, who otherwise would have organ-confined disease, will now have a higher probability of recurrence than those with completely resected extraprostatic disease.
机译:背景:在前列腺癌根治性切除术(RP)期间,将囊膜切开术(CapI)切入肿瘤的预后意义与其他器官受限疾病相比仍不确定。目的:评估CapI进入肿瘤对肿瘤预后的影响。设计,地点和参与者:回顾性研究了1985年至2008年之间在渥太华医院和纪念斯隆-凯特琳癌症中心(均为三级学术中心)接受治疗的8110例前列腺癌患者。干预措施:所有患者均接受开放,腹腔镜或腹腔镜手术。机器人RP。措施:将患者分为四个病理类别:第1组(CapI组),手术切缘阳性(PSMs)而无前列腺外扩张(EPE)。第2组,无EPE的手术切缘阴性(NSMs);第3组,具有EPE的NSM;组4,具有EPE的PSM。无复发生存率的估计是通过Kaplan-Meier方法得出的。复发定义为前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)> 0.2 ng / ml且呈上升趋势。使用Cox比例风险回归来估计风险比(HR),以控制治疗前PSA,RP日期,RP Gleason总和,精囊浸润和淋巴结受累的复发。在模型中通过包括变量EPE和手术切缘(SMs)及其相互作用来定义病理学类别。结果与限制:中位随访时间为37.3个月。 CapI组进行RP后5年无复发的机率是77%(95%置信区间[CI],72-83)。这不仅劣于NSMs而无EPE的患者(log rank p <0.0001),也逊于NSMs和EPE的患者(log rank p = 0.0002)。在多变量分析中,EPE和SM之间的相互作用不显着(p = 0.26)。在排除交互作用项的调整模型中,EPE患者的复发风险增加(HR:1.80; 95%CI,1.49-2.17; p <0.0001),而边缘阳性的患者(HR:1.81; 95%CI, 1.51-2.15; p <0.0001)。这是一项回顾性研究。结论:CapI进入肿瘤对RP后患者的预后有重要影响。与那些完全切除前列腺外疾病的患者相比,原本会患有器官受限疾病的患者现在复发的可能性更高。

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