BACKGROUND: Current trials are investigating radical intervention in men with metastatic prostate cancer.
However, there is a lack of safety data for radical prostatectomy as therapy in this setting.
OBJECTIVE: To examine perioperative outcomes and short-term complications after radical prostatectomy for locally resectable, distant metastatic prostate cancer.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective case series from 2007 to 2014 comprising 106 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic (M1) prostate cancer from the USA, Germany, Italy, and Sweden.
INTERVENTION: Radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymphadenectomy.
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics were used to present margin status, continence, and readmission, reoperation, and overall complication rates at 90 d, as well as for 21 specific complications. Kaplan-Meier plots were used to estimate survival function. Intercenter variability and M1a/ M1b subgroups were examined.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Some 79.2% of patients did not suffer any complications; positive-margin (53.8%), lymphocele (8.5%), and wound infection (4.7%) rates were higher in our cohort than in a meta-analysis of open radical prostatectomy performed for standard indications. At a median follow-up of 22.8 mo, 94/106 (88.7%) men were still alive. The study is limited by its retrospective design, differing selection criteria, and short follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: Radical prostatectomy for men with locally resectable, distant metastatic prostate cancer appears safe in expert hands for meticulously selected patients. Overall and specific complication rates related to the surgical extirpation are not more frequent than when radical prostatectomy is performed for standard indications, and the use of extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in all of this cohort compared to its selective use in localized/locally advanced prostate cancer accounts for any extra morbidity.
PATIENT SUMMARY: Men presenting with advanced prostate cancer that has spread beyond the prostate are increasingly being considered for treatments directed at the prostate itself. On the basis of results for our international series of 106 men, surgery appears reasonably safe in this setting for certain patients.
Written by:
Sooriakumaran P, Karnes J, Stief C, Copsey B, Montorsi F, Hammerer P, Beyer B, Moschini M, Gratzke C, Steuber T, Suardi N, Briganti A, Manka L, Nyberg T, Dutton SJ, Wiklund P, Graefen M. Are you the author?
Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Mayo Clinic Department of Urology, Rochester, USA; Department of Urology, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Munich, Germany; Centre for Statistics in Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Department of Urology, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy; Department of Urology/Uro-oncology, Academic Hospital Braunschweig, Brunswick, Germany; Martini Clinic, Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Uro-clinic, St. Goran Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Reference: Eur Urol. 2015 May 30. pii: S0302-2838(15)00425-X.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.05.023
PubMed Abstract
PMID: 26038098
UroToday.com Prostate Cancer Section
