Radical perineal prostatectomy for treatment of localized prostate cancer in obese and nonobese patients: A matched control study

Yang, Benjamin; Gan, Tong J.; Salmen, Chas R.; Cancel, Quinton V.; Vieweg, Johannes; Dahm, Philipp

doi:10.1016/j.urology.2005.11.046

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Whereas, a significant increased complication rate in the obese group (16.9% vs 7%, p = 0.03) has been reported. 15 To our knowledge, our study is the first to compare oncological (PSM and BCR rates) and functional outcomes (continence and erectile function) between obese and non-obese men undergoing RPP.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…[9][10][11] Literature evaluating the limitations of radical perineal prostatectomy (RPP) in obese men is limited. [12][13][14][15] We have analyzed our RPP outcomes stratified by body mass index (BMI) categories to determine the perioperative morbidity, oncologic and functional outcomes in overweight and obese men compared with a normal-weight cohort.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impact of obesity on functional and oncological outcomes in radical perineal prostatectomy

Altay

Erkurt

Guzelburc

et al. 2015

CUAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:We evaluated the impact of obesity on perioperative morbidity, functional, and oncological outcomes after radical perineal prostatectomy (RPP). Methods: A total of 298 consecutive patients underwent RPP at our institution. Patients were categorized into 3 groups based on their body mass index (BMI): Normal weight <25 kg/m 2 (Group 1), overweight 25 to <30 kg/m 2 (Group 2), and obese ≥30 kg/m 2 (Group 3). We compared the groups with respect to perioperative data, postoperative oncologic, and functional outcomes. Evaluation of urinary continence and erectile function was performed using a patient-reported questionnaire and the International Index of Erectile Function-5 questionnaire, respectively, administered preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months. Limitations included short follow-up time, retrospective design and lack of a morbidly obese group. Results: No significant differences were found among the 3 groups with regard to operative time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, catheter removal time, positive surgical margin, and complication rates. At 12 months, 94.7%, 95% and 95% of normal, overweight and obese patients, respectively, were continent (free of pad use) (p = 0.81). At 12 months, 30.6%, 29.8% and 30.4% of patients had spontaneous erections and were able to penetrate and complete intercourse in Group 1, Group 2, and Group 3, respectively (p = 0.63). Conclusions:In this cohort of patients, no clinically relevant risks were associated with increasing BMI.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of obesity on functional and oncological outcomes in radical perineal prostatectomy

Altay

Erkurt

Guzelburc

et al. 2015

CUAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The most recent matchedcontrolled study of 71 severely obese (BMI 1 35) and 71 nonobese patients, however, did find an increased risk of both surgical and anesthesia-related perioperative complications, e.g. laryngospasm requiring reintubation, myocardial infarction, rectal injury and pulmonary edema [20] . This study did not provide information about late complications and functional outcomes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Impact of Obesity on Surgical Outcomes following Open Radical Prostatectomy

Roermund

Basten²,

Kiemeney³

et al. 2009

Urol Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The increasing incidence of both obesity and prostate cancer (PCa) detection will confront the urologist more often with obese men having PCa. It is unknown whether obesity affects the surgical and oncological outcomes following open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP). Knowledge concerning this issue is relevant when counselling obese patients with PCa for RRP. Patients and Methods: A single institution cohort study was performed including 252 men who underwent a RRP between 1992 and 2003. The surgical complications (perioperative complications, post-RRP urinary incontinence, urethral strictures) were compared between obese (BMI >30) and nonobese (BMI ≤30) men. Results: Compared to nonobese (n = 221), obese men (n = 31) developed more frequently wound infections (16.1 vs. 4.5%; p < 0.05), urinary incontinence (25.8 vs. 8.7%; p < 0.05) as well as vesico-urethral strictures (46.2 vs. 12.3%; p < 0.05). The pathology results and the 5-year cumulative risk of PSA recurrence were comparable among both groups. Conclusions: Compared to nonobese, obese men suffer more frequently from post-RRP urinary incontinence and vesicourethral strictures following open RRP.

show abstract

“…Radical perineal prostatectomy (RPP) is believed by some to be advantageous in the obese, as the anterior abdominal panniculus and dorsal venous complex are avoided. Yang et al [19] compared obese and non-obese patients undergoing RPP. Similar estimated blood loss, length of stay, operative times, and PSM's were noted, but obesity was associated with the risk of complications, especially lower extremity neuropraxia.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy in the Morbidly Obese Patient

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction. Obesity and prostate cancer are among the more common health issues affecting men in the United States. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed morbidly obese (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2) patients undergoing RALP between 2004–2009 at our institution. Parameters including operative time, estimated blood loss, hospital stay, pathology, and complication rate were examined. Results. A total of 15 patients were included, with a mean BMI of 43 kg/m2. Mean preoperative PSA was 5.78 ng/dL, and Gleason score was 6.6. Mean operative time was 163 minutes, and mean estimated blood loss was 210 mL. The mean hospital stay was 1.3 days. Positive margins were noted in 2 (13%) patients, each with pT3 disease. There were no blood transfusions, open conversions, or Clavien Grade II or higher complications. Conclusions. In our experience, RALP is feasible in morbidly obese patients. We noted several challenges in this patient population which were overcome with modification of technique and experience.

show abstract

Radical perineal prostatectomy for treatment of localized prostate cancer in obese and nonobese patients: A matched control study

Cited by 12 publications

References 22 publications

Impact of obesity on functional and oncological outcomes in radical perineal prostatectomy

Impact of obesity on functional and oncological outcomes in radical perineal prostatectomy

Impact of Obesity on Surgical Outcomes following Open Radical Prostatectomy

Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy in the Morbidly Obese Patient

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About