Long-term oncological results of radical prostatectomy in patients with localized prostate cancer

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

С. О. Возіанов
С. М. Шамраєв
М. Д. Соснін
А. М. Леоненко
А. А. Грицаюк

Abstract

The objective: was to perform a comparative analysis of the direct results of a pathomorphological study of the organo-complex removed from radical prostatectomy and the frequency of biochemical recurrence (BCR) in patients with localized prostate cancer (RPP) in the performance of a retropubic radical prostatectomy (PRPD) and endoscopic radical prostatectomy (EDGE) clinics.

Materials and methods. The clinical study involved 360 patients who had undergone PRPE or ESRD in the clinic of the Institute of Urology of the National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine during 2012-2016. The patients were divided into two groups. Group 1 (n = 99) – patients who were operated in the clinic in the volume of PRPE from 2012 to 2016 inclusive, who have localized PCa, or the status of pT0. Group 2 (n=261) – patients who were operated in the clinic in the volume of ERSE from 2012 to 2016 inclusive, who have been diagnosed with localized PCa, or the status of pT0.

Results. PRP and ESRP, which are performed by patients with localized PCa in a clinic for a five-year period, show comparable oncological outcomes.

The conclusion. The implementation of multifocal biopsy and radical prostatectomy (RPE) in the same clinic promotes better comparability, reproducibility and greater consistency of the obtained morphological data. It is necessary to introduce a routine immunohistochemical study of biopsy material for further clinical practice to confirm the diagnosis of prostate cancer before performing RP.

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

How to Cite
Возіанов, С. О., Шамраєв, С. М., Соснін, М. Д., Леоненко, А. М., & Грицаюк, А. А. (2018). Long-term oncological results of radical prostatectomy in patients with localized prostate cancer. Health of Man, (1), 132–135. https://doi.org/10.30841/2307-5090.1.2018.144490
Section
Conference proceedings
Author Biographies

С. О. Возіанов, State Institution «Institute of Urology of NAMS of Ukraine»

Serhii O. Vozianov

С. М. Шамраєв, State Institution «Institute of Urology of NAMS of Ukraine»

Serhii M. Shamraev,

Department of Reconstructive and Geriatric Urology

М. Д. Соснін, State Institution «Institute of Urology of NAMS of Ukraine»

Mykola D. Sosnin,

Department of Endoscopic Urology and Lithotripsy

А. М. Леоненко, State Institution «Institute of Urology of NAMS of Ukraine»

Andrii M. Leonenko

А. А. Грицаюк, State Institution «Institute of Urology of NAMS of Ukraine»

Andrii A. Gritsiuk

References

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, А.П. Онищук, О.О. Ониськів // Урологія. – 2015. – Т. 19, № 3. – С. 15–28.

Brawley O.W. Prostate cancer epidemiology in the United States / O.W. Brawley // World Journal of Urology. – 2012. – Vol. 30, № 2. – P. 195–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-012-0824-2

Siegel R. Cancer statistics, 2013 / R. Siegel, D. Naishadham, A. Jemal // CA: a Cancer Journal for Clinicians. – 2013. – Vol. 63, № 1. – P. 11–30. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21166

Скринінг раку передміхурової залози / Е.О. Стаховський, З.П. Федоренко, Ю.В. Вітрук, Р.А. Литвиненко, М.В. Пікуль [et al.] // Клінічна онкологія. – 2016. – Т. 21, № 1. – С. 50–53.

pT0 prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy / J.L. Gross, T.A. Masterson, L. Cheng, P.A. Johnstone // Journal of Surgical Oncology. – 2010. – Vol. 102, № 4. – P. 331–333. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.21647

Stage pT0 after radical prostatectomy: a diagnostic dilemma / S. Schirrmacher, P. Kallidonis, L.-C. Horn, H. Nenning, J. Rassler [et al.] // World Journal of Urology. – 2015. – Vol. 33, № 9. – P. 1291–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-014-1441-z

Evaluation of pT0 prostate cancer in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy / D.M. Moreira, B. Gershman, L.J. Rangel, S.A. Boorjian, R.H. Thompson [et al.] // BJU International. – 2016. – Vol. 118, № 3. – P. 379–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13266

Prognostic Gleason grade grouping: data based on the modified Gleason scoring system / P.M. Pierorazio, P.C. Walsh, A.W. Partin, J.I. Epstein // BJU International. – 2013. – Vol. 111, № 5. – P. 753–760. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11611.x

EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II: treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer / A. Heidenreich, P.J. Bastian, J. Bellmunt, M. Bolla, S. Joniau [et al.] // European Urology. – 2014. – Vol. 65, № 2. – P. 467–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.11.002

Унгуряну Т.Н. Краткие рекомендации по описанию, статистическому анализу и представлению данных в научных публикациях / Т.Н. Унгуряну, А.М. Гржибовский // Экология человека. – 2011. – № 5. – C. 55–60.

Search for residual prostate cancer on pT0 radical prostatectomy after positive biopsy / R. Mazzucchelli, F. Barbisan, A. Tagliabracci, A. Lopez-Beltran, L. Cheng [et al.] // Virchows Archiv. – 2007. – Vol. 450, № 4. – P. 371–378. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007%2Fs00428-007-0367-x