Patient-reported outcomes after open radical prostatectomy, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and permanent prostate brachytherapy

被引:7
作者
Hashine, Katsuyoshi [1 ]
Kakuda, Toshio [1 ]
Luchi, Shunsuke [1 ]
Tomida, Ryotaro [1 ]
Matsumura, Masafumi [1 ]
机构
[1] Natl Hosp Org Shikoku Canc Ctr, Dept Urol, 160 Minamiumemoto, Matsuyama, Ehime 7910280, Japan
关键词
patient-reported outcome; open radical prostatectomy; laparoscopic radical prostatectomy; permanent prostate brachytherapy; Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; CANCER; ASSOCIATION; TRIAL;
D O I
10.1093/jjco/hyz116
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objective: To assess patient-reported outcomes after open radical prostatectomy, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and permanent prostate brachytherapy. Methods: patient-reported outcomes were evaluated using Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite scores at baseline and 1, 3, 6, 12 and 36 months after treatment, respectively, using differences from baseline scores. Results: Urinary function was the same in the three groups at baseline, but worse after surgery than after permanent prostate brachytherapy until 12 months, and similar after open radical prostatectomy and permanent prostate brachytherapy and better than after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy at 36 months. Urinary bother was significantly worse at 1 month after surgery, but better after open radical prostatectomy than after permanent prostate brachytherapy and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy at 3 months, after which symptoms improved gradually in all groups. Obstructive/irritative symptoms were worse after permanent prostate brachytherapy than after open radical prostatectomy at 36 months, and worse after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy until 6 months. Urinary incontinence was worse after surgery, particularly after 1 month. This symptom returned to the baseline level at 12 months after open radical prostatectomy, but recovery after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy was slower. Bowel function after permanent prostate brachytherapy was significantly worse than after surgery at 1 month and this continued until 6 months. Bowel bother was slightly worse at 3 and 6 months after permanent prostate brachytherapy compared to these time points after surgery. Conclusion: Urinary function and bother were worst after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, especially in the early postoperative phase, whereas urinary obstructive/irritative symptom, bowel function and bother were worse after permanent prostate brachytherapy. These findings are useful and informative for the treatment of patients with prostate cancer.
引用
收藏
页码:1037 / 1042
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Evaluation of Patient- and Surgeon-Specific Variations in Patient-Reported Urinary Outcomes 3 Months After Radical Prostatectomy From a Statewide Improvement Collaborative
    Auffenberg, Gregory B.
    Qi, Ji
    Dunn, Rodney L.
    Linsell, Susan
    Kim, Tae
    Miller, David C.
    Tosoian, Jeffrey
    Sarle, Richard
    Johnston, William K., III
    Kleer, Eduardo
    Ghani, Khurshid R.
    Montie, James
    Peabody, James
    JAMA SURGERY, 2021, 156 (03)
  • [32] Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
    Krongrad A.
    Current Urology Reports, 2000, 1 (1) : 36 - 40
  • [33] Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
    Hoznek A.
    Samadi D.B.
    Salomon L.
    Olsson L.E.
    Saint F.
    Chopin D.
    Abbou C.-C.
    Current Urology Reports, 2002, 3 (2) : 141 - 147
  • [34] Clinical effects of laparoscopic versus open radical prostatectomy in the treatment of early prostate cancer
    Guan, Yi
    Tan, Changbin
    Zhu, Hengcheng
    Li, Haoyong
    Liu, Haitao
    Hu, Wei
    Song, Huajie
    Xiao, Fei
    AFRICAN JOURNAL OF REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH, 2025, 29 (02): : 106 - 112
  • [35] Patients Regret Their Choice of Therapy Significantly Less Frequently after Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy as Opposed to Open Radical Prostatectomy: Patient-Reported Results of the Multicenter Cross-Sectional IMPROVE Study
    Wolff, Ingmar
    Burchardt, Martin
    Gilfrich, Christian
    Peter, Julia
    Baunacke, Martin
    Thomas, Christian
    Huber, Johannes
    Gillitzer, Rolf
    Sikic, Danijel
    Fiebig, Christian
    Steinestel, Julie
    Schifano, Paola
    Loebig, Niklas
    Bolenz, Christian
    Distler, Florian A.
    Huettenbrink, Clemens
    Janssen, Maximilian
    Schilling, David
    Barakat, Bara
    Harke, Nina N.
    Fuhrmann, Christian
    Manseck, Andreas
    Wagenhoffer, Robert
    Geist, Ekkehard
    Blair, Lisa
    Pfitzenmaier, Jesco
    Reinhardt, Bettina
    Hoschke, Bernd
    Burger, Maximilian
    Bruendl, Johannes
    Schnabel, Marco J.
    May, Matthias
    CANCERS, 2022, 14 (21)
  • [36] Agreement between patient reported outcomes and clinical reports after radical prostatectomy - a prospective longitudinal study
    Bock, David
    Angenete, Eva
    Bjartell, Anders
    Hugosson, Jonas
    Steineck, Gunnar
    Walming, Sofie
    Wiklund, Peter
    Haglind, Eva
    BMC UROLOGY, 2019, 19 (1)
  • [37] Open radical retropubic prostatectomy
    Barre, Christian
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2007, 52 (01) : 71 - 80
  • [38] Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy vs laparoscopic and open retropubic radical prostatectomy: functional outcomes 18 months after diagnosis from a national cohort study in England
    Nossiter, Julie
    Sujenthiran, Arunan
    Charman, Susan C.
    Cathcart, Paul J.
    Aggarwal, Ajay
    Payne, Heather
    Clarke, Noel W.
    van der Meulen, Jan
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2018, 118 (04) : 489 - 494
  • [39] Retrospective Study of Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer after Transurethral Resection of the Prostate Compared with Retropubic Radical Prostatectomy at the Same Institution
    Suzuki, Yasutomo
    Matsuzawa, Ichiro
    Hamasaki, Tsutomu
    Kimura, Go
    Kondo, Yukihiro
    JOURNAL OF NIPPON MEDICAL SCHOOL, 2012, 79 (06) : 416 - 421
  • [40] Prospective assessment of patient reported urinary continence after radical prostatectomy
    Wei, JT
    Dunn, RL
    Marcovich, R
    Montie, JE
    Sanda, MG
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2000, 164 (03) : 744 - 747