Suppr超能文献

保留精囊的会阴根治性前列腺切除术可改善低危前列腺癌患者的早期功能结果。

Seminal vesicle-sparing perineal radical prostatectomy improves early functional results in patients with low-risk prostate cancer.

作者信息

Albers Peter, Schäfers Sebastian, Löhmer Hans, de Geeter Patrick

机构信息

Department of Urology, Klinikum Kassel GmbH, Kassel, Germany.

出版信息

BJU Int. 2007 Nov;100(5):1050-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.07123.x. Epub 2007 Aug 30.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To report a new and improved seminal vesicle-sparing (SV) technique of radical perineal prostatectomy (RPP) as an option for patients with localized prostate cancer, which is currently competing with the retropubic RP (RRP), endoscopic and robotic approaches.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From July 2003 to July 2006, 507 RPs were undertaken within a three-arm, unrandomized phase II trial. Patients were selected for RPP if they had a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of </=10 ng/mL, a Gleason sum of </=7 and a prostate volume of </=50 mL. This group was randomly divided in those having SV-RPP (147 men) and a classical RPP (171); men in the third group with adverse factors were offered a classical RRP (190). The main endpoint of the trial was the early continence rate at 4 weeks after surgery.

RESULTS

The oncological outcome of patients treated with SV-RPP was no different from that of RPP or RRP. Continence rates (0-1 pad/day) at 4 weeks and 12 months after SV-RPP were 61.7% and 96.3%, respectively, and significantly higher than with RPP (P < 0.023) and RRP (P < 0.005). The transfusion rates (3.4%), anastomotic leaks (6.6%) and mean operative duration (90 min) were significantly lower.

CONCLUSIONS

SV-RPP is a better technique in reducing complications during and after surgery for selected patients. Leaving the SV in place did not increase the short-term PSA relapse rates. As the operation was significantly faster and with better early recovery, SV-RPP might be justified if the long-term oncological data confirm the efficacy of the approach.

摘要

目的

报告一种新的改良保留精囊(SV)的根治性会阴前列腺切除术(RPP)技术,作为局限性前列腺癌患者的一种选择,目前该技术正与耻骨后RP(RRP)、内镜及机器人手术方法竞争。

患者与方法

2003年7月至2006年7月,在一项非随机的三臂II期试验中进行了507例RP手术。如果患者前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)水平≤10 ng/mL、Gleason评分≤7且前列腺体积≤50 mL,则选择行RPP。该组患者被随机分为接受保留精囊RPP(147例男性)和经典RPP(171例)两组;第三组有不良因素的男性接受经典RRP(190例)。试验的主要终点是术后4周的早期控尿率。

结果

接受保留精囊RPP治疗的患者的肿瘤学结局与RPP或RRP无异。保留精囊RPP术后4周和12个月的控尿率(每天0 - 1片尿垫)分别为61.7%和96.3%,显著高于RPP(P < 0.023)和RRP(P < 0.005)。输血率(3.4%)、吻合口漏(6.6%)及平均手术时间(90分钟)均显著更低。

结论

对于特定患者,保留精囊RPP是一种能更好地减少手术中和术后并发症的技术。保留精囊并未增加短期PSA复发率。由于该手术明显更快且早期恢复更好,如果长期肿瘤学数据证实该方法有效,保留精囊RPP可能是合理的。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验