A matter of size? Health-related quality of life after radical prostatectomy for patients with giant prostates

Does larger prostate size provide protection for cancer specific outcomes in localized prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

Benign prostatic hyperplasia is common in the aging population and frequently comorbid with localized prostate cancer. Large prostate volume places significant challenges in robotic prostatectomy including reduced mobility and visualization. The goal of this study is to evaluate the effect of prostate volume as a continuous variable on cancer specific outcomes.

METHODS

Three thousand four hundred and twenty five patients with localized prostate cancer at a single institution who underwent robotic prostatectomy were retrospectively reviewed. A number of preoperative, operative, and postoperative variables were collected to evaluate cancer specific outcomes including pathologic stage, tissue margins, and biochemical recurrence (BCR). Logistic regression models and univariate and multivariate analyses were implemented for pathologic stage T3 and BCR respectively.

RESULTS

The median follow up time was 52 months (IQR 18-95). 37.4% of the patients had a final pathologic stage of T3 or higher, 21.2% experienced positive surgical margins, and 24.7% of patients experienced BCR. Prostate size was a significant predictor of all three outcomes of interest. Increasing prostate size was protective against both higher pathologic stage and positive surgical margins (odds ratio = 0.989, 0.990 respectively, p < 0.001). There was a modest increase in the risk of BCR with increasing gland size (hazard ratio = 1.006, p < 0.001). These results were most significant for patients with Gleason Grade Groups 1 and 2 prostate cancer.

CONCLUSION

Prostate size is a commonly determined clinical factor that effects both surgical planning and cancer specific outcomes. Increasing prostate size may offer protection against higher stage disease and positive surgical margins. While surgically challenging, favorable oncologic outcomes can be consistently achieved for patients with low-intermediate risk disease.

The impact of preoperative 5-alpha reductase inhibitors on functional outcomes and health-related quality of life following radical prostatectomy - A propensity score matched longitudinal study

OBJECTIVES

While the impact of treatment with 5-alpha Reductase Inhibitors (5-ARI) on the risk of cancer-related mortality in men with prostate cancer (PC) has been extensively studied, little is known about the impact of preoperative 5-ARI use on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following radical prostatectomy (RP).

METHODS

Within our prospectively maintained institutional database of 5899 patients treated with RP for PC (2008- 2021), 99 patients with preoperative 5-ARI therapy were identified. A 1:4 propensity-score matched analysis of 442 men (n = 90 5-ARI, n = 352 no 5-ARI) was conducted. Primary endpoint was continence recovery using daily pad usage and ICIQ-SF. Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) was assessed using the validated EORTC QLQ-C30 and PR25 questionnaires. Multivariable Cox-regression-models tested the effect of preoperative 5-ARI treatment on continence-recovery (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

Patients were followed up perioperatively, followed by annual assessments up to 60mo postoperatively. Preoperative mean ICIQ-SF score (2.2 vs. 0.9) was significantly higher in the 5-ARI cohort (p = 0.006). 24mo postoperatively, 68.6% (no 5-ARI) vs. 55.7% (5-ARI) had full continence recovery (p = 0.002). Multivariable Cox regression analysis, revealed preoperative 5-ARI treatment as an independent predictor for impaired continence recovery (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.27-0.94, p = 0.03) In line, general HRQOL was significantly higher for patients without 5-ARI only up to 24mo postoperatively (70.6 vs. 61.2, p = 0.045). There was no significant impact of preoperative 5-ARI treatment on erectile function, biochemical recurrence-free survival and metastasis-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-RP 5-ARI treatment was associated with impaired continence outcomes starting 24mo postoperatively, suggesting that preoperative 5-ARI treatment can impair the long-term urinary function recovery following RP.

Impact of Preoperative LUTS on Health-related Quality of Life Following Radical Prostatectomy: A Propensity Score Matched Longitudinal Study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of preoperative lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) on long-term health-related quality of life (HRQOL) up to 10 years after radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer (PC).

METHODS

Within our prospective institutional database of 6487 patients treated with RP for PC (2008-2020), 2727 patients with preoperative LUTS (IPSS score of ≥8) were identified. A 1:1 propensity-score matched analysis of 3056 men (n = 1528 LUTS, n = 1528 no LUTS) was conducted. Primary endpoint was HRQOL (based on EORTC QLQ-C30 and PR25). Linear regression models tested the effect of preoperative LUTS on the net change in general HRQOL (P <.05).

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 48 months. Preoperative mean global health status (GHS) score (67.4 vs 75.7) was significantly lower in the LUTS cohort (P <.001). Post-RP the difference in general HRQOL between the LUTS cohort and the no-LUTS cohort became smaller (65.7 vs 67.8), however, remaining statistically significant (P = .037). In long-term follow-up, general HRQOL was comparable between both subcohorts (P-range 0.716-0.876). Multivariable linear regression analysis revealed increased preoperative IPSS as an independent predictor for increased perioperative improvement of IPSS (P <.001) CONCLUSION: For patients undergoing RP, preoperative LUTS were associated with a postoperative improvement of HRQOL outcomes. In long-term follow-up, HRQOL was comparable to patients without preoperative LUTS. Hence, RP is an efficient option to treat PC as well as LUTS in those patients.

Impact of Prostate Size on the Outcomes of Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Simple Summary

Prostate size can vary widely among men regardless of whether they have prostate cancer or not. Many studies reported very conflicting results regarding the impact of prostate size on the outcome of radical prostatectomy. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis on this topic to investigate the impact of prostate size on the operative, functional and oncological outcomes of radical prostatectomy. In general, a smaller prostate can be associated with fewer surgical complications, but with a higher chance of positive surgical margins. This can be useful when counseling patients before surgery.

Abstract

Background: The impact of prostate size on the radical prostatectomy outcome is not clear. Several published reports have shown conflicting results. Objectives: To investigate the effect of prostate size on the surgical, functional and oncological results of radical prostatectomy. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out in accordance with the PRISMA criteria. Finally, we investigated the research that reported on the impact of prostate size on radical prostatectomy outcome. The Review Manager (RevMan) software version 5.4 was utilized for statistical analysis. Results: Eighteen studies including 12,242 patients were included. Estimated blood loss was significantly less with smaller prostates (Z = 3.01; p = 0.003). The complications rate was 17% with larger prostates, compared to 10% for smaller prostates (Z = 5.73; p < 0.00001). Seventy-three percent of patients with a smaller prostate were continent within one month, compared to 64% with a larger prostate (Z = 1.59; p = 0.11). The rate of positive surgical margins was significantly higher with smaller prostates (20.2% vs. 17.8%). (Z = 2.52; p = 0.01). The incidence of biochemical recurrence was higher with smaller prostates (7.8% vs. 4.9%) (Z = 1.87; p = 0.06). Conclusion: Larger prostate size is associated with more blood loss and a higher rate of complications. However, the oncological outcome is better, compared to that in patients with smaller prostates. The impact of the size on the functional outcome is not clear.

Functional and Oncological Outcomes Following Robot-Assisted and Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer With a Large Prostate Volume: A Retrospective Analysis With Minimum 2-Year Follow-Ups

Objective

We aimed to analyze the perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) for patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa) characterized by a large prostate volume (PV; ≥50 ml) over a minimum of 2 years follow-up.

Materials and Methods

Patients undergoing RARP and LRP for localized PCa with a large PV were included in the final analysis. The perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes were analyzed between the two groups.

Results

All operations were successfully completed without open conversion in both groups. The mean operative time and estimated blood loss in the RARP group were significantly decreased compared to those in the LRP group (139.4 vs. 159.0 min, p = 0.001, and 124.2 vs. 157.3 ml, p = 0.003, respectively). Patients in the RARP arm had significantly lower proportions of grade II or lower and of higher than grade II postoperative complications compared with those in the LRP group (7.9% vs. 17.1%, p = 0.033, and 1.6% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.047, respectively). No significant differences in terms of the rates of pT3 disease, positive surgical margin, and positive lymph node were noted between the two groups. Moreover, no significant difference in the median specimen Gleason score was observed between the RARP and LRP groups (6 vs. 7, p = 0.984). RARP vs. LRP resulted in higher proportions of urinary continence upon catheter removal (48.4% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.021) and at 3 (65.1% vs. 50.5%, p = 0.025) and 24 (90.5% vs. 81.0%, p = 0.037) months post-operation. The median erectile function scores at 6 and 24 months post-operation in the RARP arm were also significantly higher than those in the LRP arm (15 vs. 15, p = 0.042, and 15 vs. 13, p = 0.026, respectively). Kaplan–Meier analyses indicated that the biochemical recurrence-free survival and accumulative proportion of continence were statistically comparable between the two groups (p = 0.315 and p = 0.020, respectively).

Conclusions

For surgically managing localized PCa with a large prostate (≥50 ml), RARP had a tendency toward a lower risk of postoperative complications and better functional preservation without cancer control being compromised when compared to LRP.