Suppr超能文献

根治性前列腺切除术、性功能保留、癌症控制。争议所在。

Radical prostatectomy, preservation of sexual function, cancer control. The controversy.

作者信息

Walsh P C

机构信息

Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.

出版信息

Urol Clin North Am. 1987 Nov;14(4):663-73.

PMID:3314061
Abstract

In this article, I have addressed some of the important controversies regarding the safety and efficacy of radical prostatectomy with the preservation of sexual function: (1) How often is sexual function preserved? (2) Does preservation of sexual function interfere with cancer control? (3) Are there tricks to performing the operation? and (4) Who is a candidate? Overall, 72 per cent of patients are potent postoperatively. The probability of return of sexual function correlates with the age of the patient and the stage of the lesion. In addition, it appears that only one neurovascular bundle is necessary for the return of sexual function because 69 per cent of men who undergo wide excision of one neurovascular bundle are potent postoperatively. The question whether preservation of sexual function compromises the removal of tumor can be analyzed in several ways. On the basis of operative descriptions and the evaluation of whole-mount cross sections of prostates removed by standard radical perineal and radical retropubic techniques, it appears that the neurovascular bundles were not completely resected in the past using standard techniques. However, with knowledge of the location of these neurovascular bundles, they can now be excised more widely when necessary than was previously possible. Furthermore, evaluation of surgical margins of excision gave no indication that the nerve-sparing modification compromises the adequacy of the removal of cancer, which is determined primarily by the extent of the tumor rather than by the operative technique. However, controversy surrounding this procedure will not be settled until long-term follow-up data are available to determine whether the control of local disease and distant metastases is similar to that achieved with standard radical prostatectomies. To aid in this comparison, we have been careful not to use postoperative adjuvant hormonal or radiation therapy so that we will be able to evaluate the true impact of radical prostatectomy on the control of cancer. To preserve sexual function, a variety of fine points in surgical technique must be observed. These have been discussed in detail. It is my opinion that any patient who is a candidate for radical prostatectomy is a candidate for intra-operative assessment of the extent of tumor and the location of the neurovascular bundles. Based on this information, the surgeon can make an informed decision whether the neurovascular bundles can be safely preserved or excised widely with the specimen. In all surgical approaches to prostatic cancer, the primary goal must be excision of all tumor; preservation of sexual function should be of secondary concern.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

摘要

在本文中,我探讨了一些关于保留性功能的根治性前列腺切除术的安全性和有效性的重要争议:(1)性功能保留的频率如何?(2)性功能的保留是否会干扰癌症控制?(3)手术操作有无技巧?以及(4)哪些患者适合接受该手术?总体而言,72%的患者术后仍有性功能。性功能恢复的概率与患者年龄和病变分期相关。此外,似乎性功能恢复只需保留一条神经血管束,因为69%接受一侧神经血管束广泛切除的男性术后仍有性功能。关于保留性功能是否会影响肿瘤切除这一问题,可以从多个方面进行分析。根据手术描述以及对采用标准经会阴根治性和耻骨后根治性技术切除的前列腺的整体横断面评估,过去使用标准技术时,神经血管束似乎并未被完全切除。然而,了解这些神经血管束的位置后,现在在必要时可以比以前更广泛地切除它们。此外,对手术切缘的评估并未表明保留神经的改良方法会影响癌症切除的充分性,癌症切除的充分性主要取决于肿瘤的范围而非手术技术。然而,在获得长期随访数据以确定局部疾病和远处转移的控制情况是否与标准根治性前列腺切除术相似之前,围绕该手术的争议不会得到解决。为了便于进行这种比较,我们一直谨慎地不使用术后辅助激素或放射治疗,以便能够评估根治性前列腺切除术对癌症控制的真正影响。为了保留性功能,必须注意手术技术中的各种细节。这些细节已进行了详细讨论。我认为,任何适合根治性前列腺切除术的患者都适合在术中评估肿瘤范围和神经血管束的位置。基于这些信息,外科医生可以做出明智的决定,即神经血管束是可以安全保留还是与标本一起广泛切除。在所有前列腺癌的手术方法中,首要目标必须是切除所有肿瘤;保留性功能应是次要考虑因素。(摘要截选至400字)

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验