O'Neil Brock, Koyama Tatsuki, Alvarez JoAnn, Conwill Ralph M, Albertsen Peter C, Cooperberg Matthew R, Goodman Michael, Greenfield Sheldon, Hamilton Ann S, Hoffman Karen E, Hoffman Richard M, Kaplan Sherrie H, Stanford Janet L, Stroup Antoinette M, Paddock Lisa E, Wu Xiao-Cheng, Stephenson Robert A, Resnick Matthew J, Barocas Daniel A, Penson David F
Department of Urologic Surgery, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee.
Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee.
J Urol. 2016 Feb;195(2):321-9. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.08.092. Epub 2015 Sep 3.
Robotic assisted radical prostatectomy has largely replaced open radical prostatectomy for the surgical management of prostate cancer despite conflicting evidence of superiority with respect to disease control or functional sequelae. Using population cohort data, in this study we examined sexual and urinary function in men undergoing open radical prostatectomy vs those undergoing robotic assisted radical prostatectomy.
Subjects surgically treated for prostate cancer were selected from 2 large population based prospective cohort studies, the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study (enrolled 1994 to 1995) and the Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation (enrolled 2011 to 2012). Subjects completed baseline, 6-month and 12-month standardized patient reported outcome measures. Main outcomes were between-group differences in functional outcome scores at 6 and 12 months using linear regression, and adjusting for baseline function, sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate outcomes between patients undergoing open radical prostatectomy and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy within and across CEASAR and PCOS.
The combined cohort consisted of 2,438 men, 1,505 of whom underwent open radical prostatectomy and 933 of whom underwent robotic assisted radical prostatectomy. Men treated with robotic assisted radical prostatectomy reported better urinary function at 6 months (mean difference 3.77 points, 95% CI 1.09-6.44) but not at 12 months (1.19, -1.32-3.71). Subjects treated with robotic assisted radical prostatectomy also reported superior sexual function at 6 months (8.31, 6.02-10.56) and at 12 months (7.64, 5.25-10.03). Sensitivity analyses largely supported the sexual function findings with inconsistent support for urinary function results.
This population based study reveals that men undergoing robotic assisted radical prostatectomy likely experience less decline in early urinary continence and sexual function than those undergoing open radical prostatectomy. The clinical meaning of these differences is uncertain and longer followup will be required to establish whether these benefits are durable.
尽管在疾病控制或功能后遗症方面的优势证据相互矛盾,但机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术在很大程度上已取代开放性根治性前列腺切除术用于前列腺癌的外科治疗。在本研究中,我们使用人群队列数据,对接受开放性根治性前列腺切除术的男性与接受机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术的男性的性功能和排尿功能进行了研究。
从两项基于人群的大型前瞻性队列研究中选取接受前列腺癌手术治疗的受试者,即前列腺癌结局研究(1994年至1995年入组)和手术与放疗比较有效性分析(2011年至2012年入组)。受试者完成了基线、6个月和12个月的标准化患者报告结局测量。主要结局是使用线性回归并调整基线功能、社会人口统计学和临床特征后,6个月和12个月时功能结局评分的组间差异。敏感性分析用于评估在CEASAR和PCOS内部及之间接受开放性根治性前列腺切除术和机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术的患者之间的结局。
合并队列包括2438名男性,其中1505名接受了开放性根治性前列腺切除术,933名接受了机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术。接受机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术治疗的男性在6个月时报告排尿功能更好(平均差异3.77分,95%CI 1.09 - 6.44),但在12个月时并非如此(1.19,-1.32 - 3.71)。接受机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术治疗的受试者在6个月时(8.31,6.02 - 10.56)和12个月时(7.64,5.25 - 10.03)也报告性功能更好。敏感性分析在很大程度上支持了性功能方面的研究结果,而对排尿功能结果的支持则不一致。
这项基于人群的研究表明,与接受开放性根治性前列腺切除术的男性相比,接受机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术的男性在早期尿失禁和性功能方面的下降可能更少。这些差异的临床意义尚不确定,需要更长时间的随访来确定这些益处是否持久。