Analysis of the use of integral combinations of efficacy radical prostatectomy and the evaluation of a new method for the formation of vesico-urethral anastomosis in endoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
The objective: is to conduct the search, systematization and analysis of existing literature publications on the use of various integral combinations of efficacy (ICE) of radical prostatectomy (RPE) in the treatment of patients with prostate cancer (PC), as well as to evaluate the efficiency of the new method for the formation of vesico urethral anastomosis (VUA) with performing endoscopic radical prostatectomy (EPPE) using the ICE and to compare the findings with other studies.
Materials and methods. Information search was conducted using the international databases PubMed, Google Scholar and electronic databases of the National Library of Ukraine named after V.I. Vernadskiy according to July 2017. Only original research was selected, literary reviews, or works published only as theses for consideration were not included. Each literary source was analyzed in a full text version, separately determined: author’s team, year of publication of the study, the number of patients, in relation to which the ICE were calculated, the number of operating surgeons, the type of RPE, the time of observation of patients, the number of patients who reached one or another ICE of RPE and its individual components. Urine continence (UC) and erectile function (EF) after the RPE were described in the focus of the method of their fixation and evaluation, followed by analysis of the obtained data, this approach is due to the problem of the lack of standardization of these states. Some author’s comments and conclusions are given at the end of the description of the source. The works, in which several ICE were defined, were described in the part of the review of the ICE, which of them is newer.
The experimental group included 24 patients who had undergone a modified ERPE in the conditions of the SI «Institute of Urology of NAMS Ukraine» for 2015–2016 years. The average follow up time for patients was 17,4±5,3 months, a monitoring point of observation was 12 months. Biochemical recurrence (BCR) was detected in the case of PSA>0,2 ng/ml, positive surgical margin (PSM) was determined by the staff of the Laboratory of pathomorphology of the SI «Institute of Urology of NAMS Ukraine». UC were determined by subjective, non strict method (no pad/one safety pad). The EF was evaluated in accordance with the possibility for intercourse in patients with more than half of the cases with or without the of 5 phosphodiesterase inhibitors. Complications were classified by P.A. Clavien (2004). The evaluation of the results was carried out by determining the number of patients who achieved trifecta and pentafecta as the most commonly used ICE’s.
Results. Generally, six separate ICE of RPE were identified, which were proposed by various authors from 2003 to 2012 years. The most commonly used were trifecta and pentafecta. The results obtained in the studies of other authors are summarized in tabular form. An analysis of the methods used by the authors to evaluate UC and EF are carried out. There were in the study group, a new method for the formation of VUA PSM was absent in 91,7%, the absence of BCR was established at 87,5%, the UC was noted at 91,7%, the preservation of EF was 62,5%, the complications were absent at 70,8% of patients. Thus, trifecta were reached 58,3%, and pentafecta were reached 50% of operated patients using a new method for the formation of VUA.
Conclusions. At present time, various authors have developed 6 different integral combinations of the efficiency of the RPE, of which the scientific community has universally recognized and the most frequently used «trifecta» (M. Benson, 2004) and «pentafecta» (V. Patel, 2011). In this paper, there were, for the first time, integrated combinations of efficacy of endoscopic RPE in patients with localized PC, as well as detailed ways of evaluating the results of the RPE according to the criteria of objectivity and severity. The obtained performance indicators of ERPE with the proposed method for the formation of VUA correspond to the data of modern literature, the implementation of the new method does not compromise the oncological results of ERPE with the achievement of trifecta in 58,3%, and pentafecta – in 50% of patients with localized PC. The use of the «octafecta» concept regarding the surgical treatment of PC contravenes the norms of generally accepted clinical practice in Ukraine and is not recommended for implementation in clinical work.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain the copyright and grant the journal the first publication of original scientific articles under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which allows others to distribute work with acknowledgment of authorship and first publication in this journal.
References
Возіанов С.О. Первинна, загальна захворюваність, смертність від основних хвороб органів сечостатевої системи в аспекті діяльності ДУ «Інститут урології НАМН України» / С.О. Возіанов, Н.О. Сайдакова, В.М. Григоренко [et al.] // Урологія. – 2015. – Т. 19, No 3. – С. 15–28.
Brawley O.W. Prostate cancer epidemiology in the United States / O.W. Brawley // World Journal of Urology. – 2012. – Vol. 30, No 2. – P. 195–200.
Siegel R. Cancer statistics, 2013 / R. Siegel, D. Naishadham, A. Jemal // CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. – 2013. – Vol. 63, No 1. – P. 11–30.
Стаховський Е.О. Скринінг раку передміхурової залози / Е.О. Стаховський, З.П. Федоренко, Ю.В. Вітрук [et al.] // Клінічна онкологія. – 2016. – Т. 21, No 1. – С. 50–53.
Возіанов С.О., Шамраєв С.М., Леоненко А.М., Гурженко А.Ю., Возіанов О.С.. Пат. на корисну модель No 114844 Україна, МПК (2006): A61B 17/00, A61B 17/04 (2006.01), A61B 17/94 (2006.01). Спосіб формування везико уретрального анастамозу при радикальній простатектомії; ДУ «ІУНАМНУ» (UA). – No u201608999; заявл. 23.08.2016; Опубл. 27.03.2017 – Бюл. No 6.
Dindo D. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey / D. Dindo, N. Demartines, P.A. Clavien // Annals of Surgery. – 2004. – Vol. 240, No 2. – P. 205–213.
Clavien P.A. The Clavien Dindo classification of surgical complications: five year experience / P.A. Clavien, J. Barkun, M.L. de Oliveira [et al.] // Annals of Surgery. – 2009. – Vol. 250, No 2. – P. 187–196.
Cambio A.J. Minimising postoperative incontinence following radical prostatectomy: considerations and evidence / A.J. Cambio, C.P. Evans // European Urology. – 2006. – Vol. 50, No 5. – P. 903–913.
Толкач Ю.В. Новый способ реконструкции шейки мочевого пузыря во время радикальной простатэктомии у пациентов с локализованным раком предстательной железы (клиническое исследование) / Ю.В. Толкач, С.Б. Петров, S. Schelin, М.В. Резванцев // Онкоурология. – 2011. – No 3. – С. 99–106.
Salomon L. Combined reporting of cancer control and functional results of radical prostatectomy / L. Salomon, F. Saint, A.G. Anastasiadis [et al.] // European Urology. – 2003. – Vol. 44, No 6. – P. 656–660.
Pierorazio P.M. Preoperative risk stratification predicts likelihood of concurrent PSA free survival, continence, and potency (the trifecta analysis) after radical retropubic prostatectomy / P.M. Pierorazio, B.A. Spencer, T.R. McCann [et al.] // Urology. – 2007. – Vol. 70, No 4. – P. 717–722.
Saranchuk J.W. Achieving optimal outcomes after radical prostatectomy / J.W. Saranchuk, M.W. Kattan, E. Elkin [et al.] // Journal of Clinical Oncology. – 2005. – Vol. 23, No 18. – P. 4146–4151.
Patel V.R. Pentafecta: a new concept for reporting outcomes of robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy / V.R. Patel, A. Sivaraman, R.F. Coelho [et al.] // European urology. – 2011. – Vol. 59, No 5. – P. 702–707.
Sivaraman A. A new concept in reporting outcomes of robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the octafecta / A. Sivaraman, S. Chauhan, O. Schatloff [et al.] // European Urology Supplements. – 2011. – Vol. 10, No 8. – P. 551.
Ficarra V. Systematic review of methods for reporting combined out comes after radical prostatectomy and proposal of a novel system: the survival, continence, and potency (SCP) classification / V. Ficarra, P. Sooriakumaran, G. Novara [et al.] // European Urology. – 2012. – Vol. 61, No 3. – P. 541–548.
Shikanov S.A. Trifecta outcomes after robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy / S.A. Shikanov, K.C. Zorn, G.P. Zagaja, A.L. Shalhav // Urology. – 2009. – Vol. 74, No 3. – P. 619–623.
Walsh P.C. The status of radical prostatectomy in the United States in 1993: where do we go from here? / P.C. Walsh // The Journal of Urology. – 1994. – Vol. 152, No 5. – P. 1816.
Електронний словник Merriam Webster – стаття «Trifecta» [електронний ресурс] pежим доступу?: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/trifecta (дата звернення: 18.07.17). – назва з екрана.
Litwin M.S. Evaluation of combined oncological and functional outcomes after radical prostatectomy: trifecta rate of achieving continence, potency and cancer control a literature review [editorial comment]. / M.S. Litwin // Urology. – 2010. – Vol. 76, No 5. – P. 1198.
Bianco F.J. Radical prostatectomy: long term cancer control and recovery of sexual and urinary function («trifecta») / F.J. Bianco, P.T. Scardino, J.A. Eastham // Urology. – 2005. – Vol. 66, No 5. – P. 83–94.
Sonnenberg F.A. Markov models in medical decision making: a practical guide / F.A. Sonnenberg, J.R. Beck // Medical Decision Making. – 1993. – Vol. 13, No 4. – P. 322–338.
D’Amico A.V. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation therapy for patients with clinically localized prostate carcinoma in the prostate specific antigen era / A.V. D’Amico, R. Whittington, S.B. Malkowicz [et al.] // Cancer. – 2002. – Vol. 95, No 2. – P. 281–286.
Eastham J.A. Predicting an optimal outcome after radical prostatectomy: the trifecta nomogram / J.A. Eastham, P.T. Scardino, M.W. Kattan // The Journal of Urology. – 2008. – Vol. 179, No 6. – P. 2207–2211.
Litwin M.S. The UCLA prostate cancer index: development, reliability, and
validity of a health related quality of life measure / M.S. Litwin, R.D. Hays, A. Fink [et al.] // Medical care. – 1998. – Vol. 36, No 7. – P. 1002–1012.
Patel V.R. Continence, potency and oncological outcomes after robotic assisted radical prostatectomy: early trifecta results of a high volume surgeon: trifecta outcomes after RARP / V.R. Patel, R.F. Coelho, S. Chauhan [et al.] // BJU International. – 2010. – Vol. 106, No 5. – P. 696–702.
Antebi E. Oncological and functional outcomes following open radical prostatectomy: how patients may achieve the «trifecta»? / E. Antebi, A. Eldefrawy, D. Katkoori [et al.] // International Brazil Journal of Urology. – 2011. – Vol. 37, No 3. – P. 320–327.
Ploussard G. Prospective evaluation of combined oncological and functional outcomes after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: trifecta rate of achieving continence, potency and cancer control at 2 years: trifecta after extraperitoneal laparoscopic prostatectomy / G. Ploussard, A. de la Taille, E. Xylinas [et al.] // BJU International. – 2011. – Vol. 107, No 2. – P. 274–279.
Novara G. Trifecta outcomes after robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy / G. Novara, V. Ficarra, C. D’Elia [et al.] // BJU International. – 2011. – Vol. 107, No 1. – P. 100–104.
Xylinas E. Evaluation of combined oncologic and functional outcomes after robotic assisted laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy: trifectarate of achieving continence, potency and cancer control / E. Xylinas, X. Durand, G. Ploussard [et al.] // Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations. – 2013. – Vol. 31, No 1. – P. 99–103.
Ou Y.C. The trifecta outcome in 300 consecutive cases of robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy according to D’Amico risk criteria / Y.C. Ou, C.K. Yang, J. Wang [et al.] // European Journal of Surgical Oncology (EJSO). – 2013. – Vol. 39, No 1. – P. 107–113.
Michl U. Use of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors may adversely impact biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy / U. Michl, F. Molfenter, M. Graefen [et al.] // The Journal of Urology. – 2015. – Vol. 193, No 2. – P. 479–483.
Loeb S. Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor use and disease recurrence after prostate cancer treatment / S. Loeb, Y. Folkvaljon, D. Robinson [et al.] // European Urology. – 2016. – Vol. 70, No 5. – P. 824–828.
Gallina A. A detailed analysis of the association between postoperative phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor use and the risk of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy / A. Gallina, M. Bianchi, G. Gandaglia [et al.] // European Urology. – 2015. – Vol. 68, No 5. – P. 750–753.
Jo J.K. Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor use following radical prostatectomy is not associated with an increased risk of biochemical recurrence / J.K. Jo, K. Kim, S.E. Lee [et al.] // Annals of Surgical Oncology. – 2016. – Vol. 23, No 5. – P. 1760–1767.
Hatzichristodoulou G. Extended versus limited pelvic lymph node dissection during bilateral nerve sparing radical prostatectomy and its effect on continence and erectile function recovery: long term results and trifectarates of a comparative analysis / G. Hatzichristodoulou, S. Wagenpfeil, G. Wagenpfeil [et al.] // World Journal of Urology. – 2016. – Vol. 34, No 6. – P. 811–820.
Ficarra V. Long term evaluation of survival, continence and potency (SCP) outcomes after robot assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP): long term survival, continence and potency outcomes after RARP / V. Ficarra, M. Borghesi, N. Suardi [et al.] // BJU International. – 2013. – Vol. 112, No 3. – P. 338–345.
Asimakopoulos A.D. Laparoscopic versus robot assisted bilateral nerve sparing radical prostatectomy: comparison of pentafecta rates for a single surgeon / A.D. Asimakopoulos, R. Miano, N. Di Lorenzo [et al.] // Surgical Endoscopy. – 2013. – Vol. 27, No 11. – P. 4297–4304.
Si Tu J. Prospective evaluation of pentafecta outcomes at 5 years after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: results of 170 patients at a single center / J. Si Tu, M.H. Lu, L.Y. Li [et al.] // Neoplasma. – 2013. – Vol. 60, No 3. – P. 309–314.
Gao X. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncological and functional results of 126 patients with a minimum 3 year follow up at a single Chinese institute / X. Gao, J. H. Zhou, L. Y. Li [et al.] // Asian Journal of Andrology. – 2009. – Vol. 11, No 5. – P. 548.
Good D.W. Analysis of the pentafecta learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy / D.W. Good, G.D. Stewart, J.U. Stolzenburg, S.A. McNeill // World Journal of Urology. – 2014. – Vol. 32, No 5. – P. 1225–1233.
Раснер П.И. Сравнительный анализ функциональных результатов радикальной позадилонной и робот ассистированной простатэктомии у больных локализованным раком предстательной железы / П.И. Раснер, Д.В. Котенко, К.Б. Колонтарев, Д.Ю. Пушкарь // Экспериментальная и клиническая урология. – 2014. – Т. 4. – С. 26–30.
Gárate J. Resultados de pentafectaen prostatectomнa radical robуtica: primeros 100 casos en un hospital pъblico latinoamericano / J. Gárate, R. Sánchez Salas, R. Valero [et al.] // Actas Urolуgicas Espaсolas. – 2015. – Vol. 39, No 1. – P. 20–25.
Bove P. 3D vs 2D laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in organ confined prostate cancer: comparison of operative data and pentafecta rates: a single cohort study / P. Bove, V. Iacovelli, F. Celestino [et al.] // BMC Urology. – 2015. – Vol. 15. – P. 12.
Ou Y. C. Retro apical transection of the urethra during robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in an Asian population. / Y. C. Ou, S. W. Hung, J. Wang [et al.] // BJU International. – 2012. – Vol. 110, No 2b. – P. E57–E63.
Coelho R.F. Influence of modified posterior reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter on early recovery of continence and anastomotic leakage rates after robot assisted radical prostatectomy / R.F. Coelho, S. Chauhan, M.A. Orvieto [et al.] // European Urology. – 2011. – Vol. 59, No 1. – P. 72–80.
Ou Y. C. Pentafecta outcomes of 230 cases of robotic assisted radical prostatectomy with bilateral neurovas cular bundle preservation / Y. C. Ou, C. K. Yang, H. M. Kang [et al.] // Anticancer Research. – 2015. – Vol. 35, No 9. – P. 5007–5013.
Мосоян A.С. Пятилетний опыт лечения рака предстательной железы на роботе «Da Vinci» / A.С. Мосоян, A.Х. Аль Шукри, A.М. Ильин // Нефрология. – 2016. – Т. 20, No 4. – С. 103–106.
Возіанов С.О. Модифікація лапароскопічної та ендовідеоскопічної екстраперитонеальної радикальної простатектомії / С.О. Возіанов, С.М. Шамраєв, А.М. Леоненко // Урологія. – 2017. – No 4 (article in press).
