Surgery for high-risk localized prostate cancer.
Standard
Surgery for high-risk localized prostate cancer. / Schmitges, Jan; Trinh, Quoc-Dien; Walz, Jochen; Graefen, Markus.
in: Ther Adv Urol, Jahrgang 3, Nr. 4, 4, 2011, S. 173-182.Publikationen: SCORING: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift/Zeitung › SCORING: Zeitschriftenaufsatz › Forschung › Begutachtung
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Surgery for high-risk localized prostate cancer.
AU - Schmitges, Jan
AU - Trinh, Quoc-Dien
AU - Walz, Jochen
AU - Graefen, Markus
PY - 2011
Y1 - 2011
N2 - Treatment of men with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) remains challenging for urologists. The complex natural history of high-risk PCa and the lack of specific and accurate definitions for high-risk disease impede treatment decision making. Historically, surgery in this patient group has been avoided based on the perception of ostensibly higher complication rates associated with inferior functional and oncological outcomes. To date, no randomized data comparing different therapy approaches have been made available. Several investigators have reported that continence rates in patients after radical prostatectomy (RP) for high-risk disease seem to be unaffected. Similarly, in a large proportion of these men, a nerve-sparing procedure can be performed without a significant negative impact on surgical margin rates and with comparable potency results. Moreover, extended pelvic lymph node dissection (EPLND) contributes to accurate pathological staging with a marginal effect on perioperative morbidity. With regards to the benefits of RP on local recurrence and cure rates, realistic expectations regarding the success of RP alone or in the context of a multimodal approach should be provided during patient counseling.
AB - Treatment of men with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) remains challenging for urologists. The complex natural history of high-risk PCa and the lack of specific and accurate definitions for high-risk disease impede treatment decision making. Historically, surgery in this patient group has been avoided based on the perception of ostensibly higher complication rates associated with inferior functional and oncological outcomes. To date, no randomized data comparing different therapy approaches have been made available. Several investigators have reported that continence rates in patients after radical prostatectomy (RP) for high-risk disease seem to be unaffected. Similarly, in a large proportion of these men, a nerve-sparing procedure can be performed without a significant negative impact on surgical margin rates and with comparable potency results. Moreover, extended pelvic lymph node dissection (EPLND) contributes to accurate pathological staging with a marginal effect on perioperative morbidity. With regards to the benefits of RP on local recurrence and cure rates, realistic expectations regarding the success of RP alone or in the context of a multimodal approach should be provided during patient counseling.
M3 - SCORING: Journal article
VL - 3
SP - 173
EP - 182
JO - Ther Adv Urol
JF - Ther Adv Urol
SN - 1756-2872
IS - 4
M1 - 4
ER -