Short-term oncological and surgical outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A retrospective multicenter cohort study in Japan (the MSUG94 group).
oncological outcomes and perioperative complications
prostate cancer
robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
Journal
Asian journal of endoscopic surgery
ISSN: 1758-5910
Titre abrégé: Asian J Endosc Surg
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 101506753
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2022
Oct 2022
Historique:
revised:
15
04
2022
received:
22
02
2022
accepted:
21
04
2022
pubmed:
5
5
2022
medline:
5
10
2022
entrez:
4
5
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We evaluated oncological outcomes of patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) for prostate cancer (PCa) and their perioperative complications in Japan. We investigated clinical and pathological covariates to predict biochemical recurrence (BCR) after RARP. A retrospective multicenter cohort study was conducted in RARP patients with PCa at 10 institutions in Japan. Pre- and postoperative covariates were collected from enrolled patients. The primary endpoint was defined as biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS). Additionally, the association between BCR and clinicopathological covariates was determined. We enrolled 2670 patients in this study. The median follow-up period was 26.0 months. RARP-related perioperative complications were identified in 198 patients (7.4%), including 69 patients (2.6%) with grade 3/4 complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. The 2-year BRFS was 88.0%. Using the Kaplan-Meier method, initial prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of ≤7.6 ng/mL, biopsy and pathological Gleason score (GS) of ≤7, clinical and pathological T1/2, and low/intermediate risks according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk classification, and negative surgical margin status had significant BRFS than their counterparts. In multivariate analysis, initial PSA, biopsy and pathological GS, clinical and pathological T stage, and surgical margin status significantly correlated with BCR after RARP. In this study, RARP achieved a lower incidence of perioperative complications than other studies.
Substances chimiques
Prostate-Specific Antigen
EC 3.4.21.77
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
745-752Informations de copyright
© 2022 Asia Endosurgery Task Force and Japan Society of Endoscopic Surgery and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
Références
Mikami K, Ozasa K, Miki T, et al. Dairy products and the risk of developing prostate cancer: a large-scale cohort study (JACC study) in Japan. Cancer Med. 2021;10:7298-7307.
Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer-2020 update. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2021;79:243-262.
Ilic D, Evans SM, Allan CA, Jung JH, Murphy D, Frydenberg M. Laparoscopic and robot-assisted vs open radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer: a Cochrane systematic review. BJU Int. 2018;121:845-853.
Morizane S, Yumioka T, Makishima K, et al. Impact of positive surgical margin status in predicting early biochemical recurrence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Int J Clin Oncol. 2021;26:1961-1967.
Fujimura T, Fukuhara H, Taguchi S, et al. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy significantly reduced biochemical recurrence compared to retropubic radical prostatectomy. BMC Cancer. 2017;17:454.
Fujita N, Koie T, Hashimoto Y, et al. Neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapy followed by robot-assisted and minimum incision endoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients with high-risk prostate cancer: comparison of perioperative and oncological outcomes at single institution. Int Urol Nephrol. 2018;50:1999-2005.
Li N, Song WJ, Gao J, et al. The prognostic nutritional index predicts the biochemical recurrence of patients treated with robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Prostate. 2022;82:221-226.
Pessoa RR, Maroni P, Kukreja J, Kim SP. Comparative effectiveness of robotic and open radical prostatectomy. Trans Andol Urol. 2021;10:2158-2170.
Yossepowitch O, Bjartell A, Eastham JA, et al. Positive surgical margin in radical prostatectomy: outlining the problem and its long-term consequences. Eur Urol. 2009;55:87-99.
Thompson JE, Egger S, Böhm M, et al. Superior biochemical recurrence and long-term quality-of-life outcomes are achievable with robotic radical prostatectomy after a long learning curve-updated analysis of a prospective single-surgeon cohort of 2206 consecutive cases. Eur Urol. 2018;73:664-671.
Moran PS, O'Neill M, Teljeur C, et al. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open and laparoscopic approaches: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Urol. 2013;20:312-321.
Prostate cancer. NCCN guidelines® 2022. July 2021. Accessed April 4, 2022.
Buyyounouski MK, Choyke PL, McKenney JK, et al. Prostate cancer-major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67:245-253.
Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250:187-196.
Grivas N, van den Bergh RCN, Brouwer OR, et al. Pelvic lymph node distribution and metastases of prostate and bladder cancer: a systematic literature review and template proposal. World J Uro. 2021;39(3):751-759.
Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC Jr, Amin MB, Egevad LL, ISUP Grading Committee. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005;29:1228-1242.
Touijer KS, Sjoberg DD, Benfante N, et al. Limited versus extended pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: a randomized clinical trial. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021;4:532-539.
Mistretta FA, Boeri L, Grasso AA, et al. Extended versus standard pelvic lymphadenectomy during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: the role of extended template as an independent predictor of lymph node invasion with comparable morbidity burden. Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2017;69:475-485.
Kumar A, Samavedi S, Mouraviev V, et al. Predictive factors and oncological outcomes of persistently elevated prostate-specific antigen in patients following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Robot Surg. 2017;11:37-45.
D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Molkowics SB, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 1998;280:969-974.
Yang CW, Wang HH, Hassouna MF, et al. Prediction of a positive surgical margin and biochemical recurrence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Sci Rep. 2021;11:14329.
Abdollah F, Dalela D, Sood A, et al. Intermediate-term cancer control outcomes in prostate cancer patients treated with robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a multi-institutional analysis. World J Urol. 2016;34:1357-1366.
Rajan P, Hagman A, Sooriakumaran P, et al. Oncologic outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a large European single-centre cohort with median 10-year follow-up. Eur Urol Focus. 2018;4:351-359.
Hu JC, Gandaglia G, Karakiewicz PI, et al. Comparative effectiveness of robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy cancer control. Eur Urol. 2014;66:666-672.
Kato D, Kato D, Namiki S, Ueda S, et al. Validation of standardized training system for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: comparison of perioperative and surgical outcomes between experienced surgeons and novice surgeons at a low-volume institute in Japan. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2022;1-9. doi:10.1080/13645706.2022.2056707
Badani KK, Kaul S, Menon M. Evolution of robotic radical prostatectomy: assessment after 2766 procedures. Cancer. 2007;110:1951-1958.
Agarwal PK, Sammon J, Bhandari A, et al. Safety profile of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a standardized report of complications in 3317 patients. Eur Urol. 2011;59:684-698.
Labban M, Bulbul M, Wazzan W, Khauli R, Hajj AE. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in the Middle East: a report on the perioperative outcomes from a tertiary care centre in Lebanon. Arab J Urol. 2020;19:152-158.