Prostate specific antigen recurrence rates are low after radical retropubic prostatectomy and positive margins

被引:93
作者
Simon, MA [1 ]
Kim, S [1 ]
Soloway, MS [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Miami, Sch Med, Dept Urol, Miami, FL 33101 USA
关键词
prostate; prostatic neoplasms; prostatectomy; recurrence;
D O I
10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00050-9
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose: Treatment in patients with a positive surgical margin after radical retropubic prostatectomy is controversial. Options are observation, radiation therapy and early hormone therapy. Making the appropriate choice should be based on an understanding of the risk of recurrence without treatment. Materials and Methods: We reviewed the records of 1,383 patients after radical retropubic prostatectomy was performed by a single surgeon. All specimens were analyzed by a single pathologist. Of the patients 936 met criteria for analysis. Results: Mean followup in these 936 patients was 45.8 months (minimum 12). The overall PSA biochemical recurrence rate was 11.5% (108 of 936 cases). Of the 936 patients 350 (37%) had tumor at an inked margin. These patients had a recurrence rate of 19% (67 of 350), while patients with negative margins had a recurrence rate of 7% (41 of 586). This difference was statistically significant (p < 0.01). Multivariate HR analysis revealed that significant risk factors for recurrence in the 936 patients were PSA greater than 20 ng/ml, clinical stage T2 or greater, Gleason 7 or greater, seminal vesicle involvement, extraprostatic extension, a visual estimate of prostate cancer volume of greater than 9.1% and positive surgical margins. Statistically significant risk factors for recurrence in patients with a positive margin on multivariate HR analysis were PSA greater than 20 ng/ml, Gleason score 7 or greater and seminal vesicle involvement. Conclusions: Although the positive margin rate in this series was 37%, the recurrence rate in these patients was only 19%. It is important to consider other factors, such as PSA, Gleason score, seminal vesicle involvement and extraprostatic extension, when making treatment decisions.
引用
收藏
页码:140 / 144
页数:5
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]   Defining prostate specific antigen progression after radical prostatectomy: What is the most appropriate cut point? [J].
Amling, CL ;
Bergstralh, EJ ;
Blute, ML ;
Slezak, JM ;
Zincke, H .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2001, 165 (04) :1146-1151
[2]   Use of nomograms to predict the risk of disease recurrence after definitive local therapy for prostate cancer [J].
Diblasio, CJ ;
Kattan, MW .
UROLOGY, 2003, 62 (6B) :9-18
[3]   Variations among individual surgeons in the rate of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens [J].
Eastham, JA ;
Kattan, MW ;
Riedel, E ;
Begg, CB ;
Wheeler, TM ;
Gerigk, C ;
Gonen, M ;
Reuter, V ;
Scardino, PT .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2003, 170 (06) :2292-2295
[4]  
EPSTEIN JI, 1993, CANCER-AM CANCER SOC, V71, P3582, DOI 10.1002/1097-0142(19930601)71:11<3582::AID-CNCR2820711120>3.0.CO
[5]  
2-Y
[6]   Incidence and significance of positive margins in radical prostatectomy specimens [J].
Epstein, JI .
UROLOGIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 1996, 23 (04) :651-&
[7]   RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY - THE PROS AND CONS OF THE PERINEAL VERSUS RETROPUBIC APPROACH [J].
FRAZIER, HA ;
ROBERTSON, JE ;
PAULSON, DF .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1992, 147 (03) :888-890
[8]   Should a positive surgical margin following radical prostatectomy be pathological stage T2 or T3? Results from the search database [J].
Freedland, SJ ;
Aronson, WJ ;
Presti, JC ;
Kane, CJ ;
Terris, MK ;
Elashoff, D ;
Amling, CL .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2003, 169 (06) :2142-2146
[9]   Percent of prostate needle biopsy cores with cancer is a significant independent predictor of prostate specific antigen recurrence following radical prostatectomy: Results from the search database [J].
Freedland, SJ ;
Aronson, WJ ;
Terris, MK ;
Kane, CJ ;
Amling, CL ;
Dorey, F ;
Presti, JC .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2003, 169 (06) :2136-2141
[10]   Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Oncological evaluation after 1,000 cases at Montsouris Institute [J].
Guillonneau, B ;
El-Fettouh, H ;
Baumert, H ;
Cathelineau, X ;
Doublet, JD ;
Fromont, G ;
Vallancien, G .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2003, 169 (04) :1261-1266