Cargando…

Selection of patients for nerve sparing surgery in robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy

CONTEXT: Robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has become the standard surgical procedure for localized prostate‐cancer (PCa). Nerve‐sparing surgery (NSS) during RARP has been associated with improved erectile function and continence rates after surgery. However, it remains unclear what are th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vis, André N., van den Bergh, Roderick C. N., van der Poel, Henk G., Mottrie, Alexander, Stricker, Philip D., Graefen, Marcus, Patel, Vipul, Rocco, Bernardo, Lissenberg‐Witte, Birgit, van Leeuwen, Pim J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8988739/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35475150
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bco2.115
_version_ 1784683030336503808
author Vis, André N.
van den Bergh, Roderick C. N.
van der Poel, Henk G.
Mottrie, Alexander
Stricker, Philip D.
Graefen, Marcus
Patel, Vipul
Rocco, Bernardo
Lissenberg‐Witte, Birgit
van Leeuwen, Pim J.
author_facet Vis, André N.
van den Bergh, Roderick C. N.
van der Poel, Henk G.
Mottrie, Alexander
Stricker, Philip D.
Graefen, Marcus
Patel, Vipul
Rocco, Bernardo
Lissenberg‐Witte, Birgit
van Leeuwen, Pim J.
author_sort Vis, André N.
collection PubMed
description CONTEXT: Robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has become the standard surgical procedure for localized prostate‐cancer (PCa). Nerve‐sparing surgery (NSS) during RARP has been associated with improved erectile function and continence rates after surgery. However, it remains unclear what are the most appropriate indications for NSS. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to systematically review the available parameters for selection of patients for NSS. The weight of different clinical variables, multiparametric magnetic‐resonance‐imaging (mpMRI) findings, and the impact of multiparametric‐nomograms in the decision‐making process on (side‐specific) NSS were assessed. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: This systematic review searched relevant databases and included studies performed from January 2000 until December 2020 and recruited a total of 15 840 PCa patients. Studies were assessed that defined criteria for (side‐specific) NSS and associated them with oncological safety and/or functional outcomes. Risk of bias assessment was performed. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Nineteen articles were eligible for full‐text review. NSS is primarily recommended in men with adequate erectile function, and with low‐risk of extracapsular extension (ECE) on the side‐of NSS. Separate clinical and radiological variables have low accuracy for predicting ECE, whereas nomograms optimize the risk‐stratification and decision‐making process to perform or to refrain from NSS when oncological safety (organ‐confined disease, PSM rates) and functional outcomes (erectile function and continence rates) were assessed. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus exists that patients who are at high risk of ECE should refrain from NSS. Several multiparametric preoperative nomograms were developed to predict ECE with increased accuracy compared with single clinical, pathological, or radiological variables, but controversy exists on risk thresholds and decision rules on a conservative versus a less‐conservative surgical approach. An individual clinical judgment on the possibilities of NSS set against the risks of ECE is warranted. PATIENT SUMMARY: NSS is aimed at sparing the nerves responsible for erection. NSS may lead to unfavorable tumor control if the risk of capsule penetration is high. Nomograms predicting extraprostatic tumor‐growth are probably most helpful.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8988739
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89887392022-04-25 Selection of patients for nerve sparing surgery in robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy Vis, André N. van den Bergh, Roderick C. N. van der Poel, Henk G. Mottrie, Alexander Stricker, Philip D. Graefen, Marcus Patel, Vipul Rocco, Bernardo Lissenberg‐Witte, Birgit van Leeuwen, Pim J. BJUI Compass Review CONTEXT: Robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has become the standard surgical procedure for localized prostate‐cancer (PCa). Nerve‐sparing surgery (NSS) during RARP has been associated with improved erectile function and continence rates after surgery. However, it remains unclear what are the most appropriate indications for NSS. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to systematically review the available parameters for selection of patients for NSS. The weight of different clinical variables, multiparametric magnetic‐resonance‐imaging (mpMRI) findings, and the impact of multiparametric‐nomograms in the decision‐making process on (side‐specific) NSS were assessed. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: This systematic review searched relevant databases and included studies performed from January 2000 until December 2020 and recruited a total of 15 840 PCa patients. Studies were assessed that defined criteria for (side‐specific) NSS and associated them with oncological safety and/or functional outcomes. Risk of bias assessment was performed. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Nineteen articles were eligible for full‐text review. NSS is primarily recommended in men with adequate erectile function, and with low‐risk of extracapsular extension (ECE) on the side‐of NSS. Separate clinical and radiological variables have low accuracy for predicting ECE, whereas nomograms optimize the risk‐stratification and decision‐making process to perform or to refrain from NSS when oncological safety (organ‐confined disease, PSM rates) and functional outcomes (erectile function and continence rates) were assessed. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus exists that patients who are at high risk of ECE should refrain from NSS. Several multiparametric preoperative nomograms were developed to predict ECE with increased accuracy compared with single clinical, pathological, or radiological variables, but controversy exists on risk thresholds and decision rules on a conservative versus a less‐conservative surgical approach. An individual clinical judgment on the possibilities of NSS set against the risks of ECE is warranted. PATIENT SUMMARY: NSS is aimed at sparing the nerves responsible for erection. NSS may lead to unfavorable tumor control if the risk of capsule penetration is high. Nomograms predicting extraprostatic tumor‐growth are probably most helpful. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-11-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8988739/ /pubmed/35475150 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bco2.115 Text en © 2021 The Authors. BJUI Compass published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJU International Company. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review
Vis, André N.
van den Bergh, Roderick C. N.
van der Poel, Henk G.
Mottrie, Alexander
Stricker, Philip D.
Graefen, Marcus
Patel, Vipul
Rocco, Bernardo
Lissenberg‐Witte, Birgit
van Leeuwen, Pim J.
Selection of patients for nerve sparing surgery in robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy
title Selection of patients for nerve sparing surgery in robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy
title_full Selection of patients for nerve sparing surgery in robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy
title_fullStr Selection of patients for nerve sparing surgery in robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy
title_full_unstemmed Selection of patients for nerve sparing surgery in robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy
title_short Selection of patients for nerve sparing surgery in robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy
title_sort selection of patients for nerve sparing surgery in robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8988739/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35475150
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bco2.115
work_keys_str_mv AT visandren selectionofpatientsfornervesparingsurgeryinrobotassistedradicalprostatectomy
AT vandenberghroderickcn selectionofpatientsfornervesparingsurgeryinrobotassistedradicalprostatectomy
AT vanderpoelhenkg selectionofpatientsfornervesparingsurgeryinrobotassistedradicalprostatectomy
AT mottriealexander selectionofpatientsfornervesparingsurgeryinrobotassistedradicalprostatectomy
AT strickerphilipd selectionofpatientsfornervesparingsurgeryinrobotassistedradicalprostatectomy
AT graefenmarcus selectionofpatientsfornervesparingsurgeryinrobotassistedradicalprostatectomy
AT patelvipul selectionofpatientsfornervesparingsurgeryinrobotassistedradicalprostatectomy
AT roccobernardo selectionofpatientsfornervesparingsurgeryinrobotassistedradicalprostatectomy
AT lissenbergwittebirgit selectionofpatientsfornervesparingsurgeryinrobotassistedradicalprostatectomy
AT vanleeuwenpimj selectionofpatientsfornervesparingsurgeryinrobotassistedradicalprostatectomy