Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Prostate Cancer
Volume 2014, Article ID 763863, 6 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/763863
Clinical Study

Robotic Prostatectomy Has a Superior Outcome in Larger Prostates and PSA Density Is a Strong Predictor of Biochemical Recurrence

Department of Urology, Hertfordshire and South Bedfordshire Robotic Urological Cancer Centre, Lister Hospital, Coreys Mill Lane, Stevenage, Hertfordshire SG1 4AB, UK

Received 7 May 2014; Accepted 26 November 2014; Published 15 December 2014

Academic Editor: James L. Gulley

Copyright © 2014 S. Bishara et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. R. M. Escudero, F. H. Amo, A. P. Borda, and C. H. Fernandez, “Preoperative predictive model for biochemical recurrence in patients with localized prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy,” Archivos Espanoles de Urologia, vol. 66, no. 6, pp. 567–575, 2013. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. T. Hashimoto, K. Yoshioka, T. Gondo et al., “Preoperative prognostic factors for biochemical recurrence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in Japan,” International Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 702–707, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. A. P. Labanaris, V. Zugor, and J. H. Witt, “Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in patients with a pathologic prostate specimen weight ≥100 grams versus ≤50 grams: surgical, oncologic and short-term functional outcomes,” Urology International, vol. 90, no. 1, pp. 24–30, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  4. M. Liss, K. Osann, and D. Ornstein, “Positive surgical margins during robotic radical prostatectomy: a contemporary analysis of risk factors,” BJU International, vol. 102, no. 5, pp. 603–607, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. A. El Hajj, G. Ploussard, A. de La Taille et al., “Analysis of outcomes after radical prostatectomy in patients eligible for active surveillance (PRIAS),” BJU International, vol. 111, no. 1, pp. 53–59, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. D. Z. Yong, M. Tsivian, D. E. Zilberman, M. N. Ferrandino, V. Mouraviev, and D. M. Albala, “Predictors of prolonged operative time during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy,” BJU International, vol. 107, no. 2, pp. 280–282, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. A. C. Huang, K. J. Kowalczyk, N. D. Hevelone et al., “The impact of prostate size, median lobe, and prior benign prostatic hyperplasia intervention on robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: technique and outcomes,” European Urology, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 595–603, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. P. Sooriakumaran, A. Srivastava, D. Bhagat et al., “Prostate volume and its correlation with histopathological outcomes in prostate cancer,” Urologia Internationalis, vol. 86, no. 2, pp. 152–155, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. P. E. Marchetti, S. Shikanov, A. A. Razmaria, G. P. Zagaja, and A. L. Shalhav, “Impact of prostate weight on probability of positive surgical margins in patients with low-risk prostate cancer after robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy,” Urology, vol. 77, no. 3, pp. 677–681, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. S. B. Allaparthi, T. Hoang, N. N. Dhanani, and I. A. Tuerk, “Significance of prostate weight on peri and postoperative outcomes of robot assisted laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy,” Canadian Journal of Urology, vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 5383–5389, 2010. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. L. P. Msezane, O. N. Gofrit, S. Lin, A. L. Shalhav, G. P. Zagaja, and K. C. Zorn, “Prostate weight: an independent predictor for positive surgical margins during robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy,” The Canadian Journal of Urology, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 3697–3701, 2007. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. P. G. Chu, S. K. Lau, L. M. Weiss et al., “Assessment of low prostate weight as a determinant of a higher positive margin rate after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a prospective pathologic study of 1,500 cases,” Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 1058–1064, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. K. C. Zorn, M. A. Orvieto, A. A. Mikhail et al., “Effect of prostate weight on operative and postoperative outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy,” Urology, vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 300–305, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. R. Frota, B. Turna, B. M. R. Santos, Y.-C. Lin, I. S. Gill, and M. Aron, “The effect of prostate weight on the outcomes of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy,” BJU International, vol. 101, no. 5, pp. 589–593, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. M. C. Benson, C. A. Olsson, D. J. McMahon, and W. H. Cooner, “The use of prostate specific antigen density to enhance the predictive value of intermediate levels of serum prostate specific antigen,” Journal of Urology, vol. 147, no. 3, pp. 817–821, 1992. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. S. Sfoungaristos and P. Perimenis, “PSA density is superior than PSA and Gleason score for adverse pathologic features prediction in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer,” Journal of the Canadian Urological Association, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 46–50, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. M. H. Radwan, Y. Yan, J. R. Luly et al., “Prostate-specific antigen density predicts adverse pathology and increased risk of biochemical failure,” Urology, vol. 69, no. 6, pp. 1121–1127, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. S. D. Kundu, K. A. Roehl, X. Yu, J. A. V. Antenor, B. K. Suarez, and W. J. Catalona, “Prostate specific antigen density correlates with features of prostate cancer aggressiveness,” The Journal of Urology, vol. 177, no. 2, pp. 505–509, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. S. J. Freedland, J. A. Wieder, G. S. Jack, F. Dorey, J. B. Dekernion, and W. J. Aronson, “Improved risk stratification for biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy using a novel risk group system based on prostate specific antigen density and biopsy Gleason score,” The Journal of Urology, vol. 168, no. 1, pp. 110–115, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. S. J. Freedland, C. J. Kane, J. C. Presti Jr. et al., “Comparison of preoperative prostate specific antigen density and prostate specific antigen for predicting recurrence after radical prostatectomy: results from the search data base,” Journal of Urology, vol. 169, no. 3, pp. 969–973, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. J. Uberoi, D. Brison, N. Patel, I. S. Sawczuk, and R. Munver, “Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer with high-risk features: predictors of favorable pathologic outcome,” Journal of Endourology, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 403–407, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. A. Tewari, R. Indudhara, K. Shinohara et al., “Comparison of transrectal ultrasound prostatic volume estimation with magnetic resonance imaging volume estimation and surgical specimen weight in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia,” Journal of Clinical Ultrasound, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 169–174, 1996. View at Google Scholar
  23. A. Rahmouni, A. Yang, C. M. C. Tempany et al., “Accuracy of in-vivo assessment of prostatic volume by MRI and transrectal ultrasonography,” Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 935–940, 1992. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus