Cargando…

Intrafascial versus interfascial nerve sparing in radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The present study aimed to systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the intrafascial and interfascial nerve sparing (ITR-NS and ITE-NS) radical prostatectomy. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for eligible studies. Meta-analysis with random-effects model was...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Weng, Hong, Zeng, Xian-Tao, Li, Sheng, Meng, Xiang-Yu, Shi, Ming-Jun, He, Da-Lin, Wang, Xing-Huan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5597634/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28904361
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-11878-7
_version_ 1783263741126639616
author Weng, Hong
Zeng, Xian-Tao
Li, Sheng
Meng, Xiang-Yu
Shi, Ming-Jun
He, Da-Lin
Wang, Xing-Huan
author_facet Weng, Hong
Zeng, Xian-Tao
Li, Sheng
Meng, Xiang-Yu
Shi, Ming-Jun
He, Da-Lin
Wang, Xing-Huan
author_sort Weng, Hong
collection PubMed
description The present study aimed to systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the intrafascial and interfascial nerve sparing (ITR-NS and ITE-NS) radical prostatectomy. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for eligible studies. Meta-analysis with random-effects model was performed. Six comparative trials were selected and embraced in this research, including one randomized controlled trial, three prospective comparative trials, and two retrospective comparative trials. With regard to perioperative parameters, no significant association of operative time, blood loss, transfusion rates, duration of catheterization, and hospital stay existed between ITR-NS and ITE-NS. With respect to the functional results, ITR-NS had advantages in terms of both continence and potency recovery compared with ITE-NS. In reference to the oncologic results, the ITR-NS showed lower overall positive surgical margin (PSM) compared with ITE-NS but pT2 PSM and biochemical recurrence free rates were similar to the two surgical types. This study demonstrates that ITR-NS has better continence at 6 mo and 36 mo and better potency recovery at 6 mo and 12 mo postoperatively, regardless of the surgical technique. The cancer control of ITR-NS was also better than that of ITE-NS. This may be explained by the fact that patients in ITE-NS group present higher risk cancer than patients in ITR-NS group.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5597634
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55976342017-09-15 Intrafascial versus interfascial nerve sparing in radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis Weng, Hong Zeng, Xian-Tao Li, Sheng Meng, Xiang-Yu Shi, Ming-Jun He, Da-Lin Wang, Xing-Huan Sci Rep Article The present study aimed to systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the intrafascial and interfascial nerve sparing (ITR-NS and ITE-NS) radical prostatectomy. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for eligible studies. Meta-analysis with random-effects model was performed. Six comparative trials were selected and embraced in this research, including one randomized controlled trial, three prospective comparative trials, and two retrospective comparative trials. With regard to perioperative parameters, no significant association of operative time, blood loss, transfusion rates, duration of catheterization, and hospital stay existed between ITR-NS and ITE-NS. With respect to the functional results, ITR-NS had advantages in terms of both continence and potency recovery compared with ITE-NS. In reference to the oncologic results, the ITR-NS showed lower overall positive surgical margin (PSM) compared with ITE-NS but pT2 PSM and biochemical recurrence free rates were similar to the two surgical types. This study demonstrates that ITR-NS has better continence at 6 mo and 36 mo and better potency recovery at 6 mo and 12 mo postoperatively, regardless of the surgical technique. The cancer control of ITR-NS was also better than that of ITE-NS. This may be explained by the fact that patients in ITE-NS group present higher risk cancer than patients in ITR-NS group. Nature Publishing Group UK 2017-09-13 /pmc/articles/PMC5597634/ /pubmed/28904361 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-11878-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Article
Weng, Hong
Zeng, Xian-Tao
Li, Sheng
Meng, Xiang-Yu
Shi, Ming-Jun
He, Da-Lin
Wang, Xing-Huan
Intrafascial versus interfascial nerve sparing in radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Intrafascial versus interfascial nerve sparing in radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Intrafascial versus interfascial nerve sparing in radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Intrafascial versus interfascial nerve sparing in radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Intrafascial versus interfascial nerve sparing in radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Intrafascial versus interfascial nerve sparing in radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort intrafascial versus interfascial nerve sparing in radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5597634/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28904361
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-11878-7
work_keys_str_mv AT wenghong intrafascialversusinterfascialnervesparinginradicalprostatectomyforlocalizedprostatecancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT zengxiantao intrafascialversusinterfascialnervesparinginradicalprostatectomyforlocalizedprostatecancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lisheng intrafascialversusinterfascialnervesparinginradicalprostatectomyforlocalizedprostatecancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mengxiangyu intrafascialversusinterfascialnervesparinginradicalprostatectomyforlocalizedprostatecancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT shimingjun intrafascialversusinterfascialnervesparinginradicalprostatectomyforlocalizedprostatecancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT hedalin intrafascialversusinterfascialnervesparinginradicalprostatectomyforlocalizedprostatecancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT wangxinghuan intrafascialversusinterfascialnervesparinginradicalprostatectomyforlocalizedprostatecancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis