Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Urological Oncology pp 799–805Cite as

Surgical Aspects of Prostate Cancer Management

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 1618 Accesses

Abstract

Cancer of the prostate (PCa) is now recognised as one of the most common solid tumours in men in the western world outnumbering lung and colorectal cancer. Prostate cancer affects elderly men more often than young men. Although large number of cases are diagnosed in early stages, a sizeable population still present with metastatic or locally advanced disease. Surgical intervention involves wide range of procedures ranging from radical extirpation to androgen deprivation procedures such as orchidectomy. The chapter does not include operative details but describes indications, advantages and disadvantages.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Quinn M, Babb P, Brock A, et al. Cancer trends in England and Wales 1950–1999. London: Stationery Office; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Nelson JB. Debate: open radical prostatectomy vs. laparoscopic vs. robotic. Urol Oncol. 2007;25:490–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wilt TJ, Thompson IM. Clinical review: clinically localised prostate cancer. BMJ. 2006;333:1102–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, et al. Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study No. 4. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:1977–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ball AJ, Gambill B, Davis JW, et al. Prospective longitudinal comparative study of early health-related quality of life outcomes in patients undergoing surgical treatment for localised prostate cancer: a short-term evaluation of five approaches from a single institution. J Endourol. 2006;20(10):723–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wood DP, Schulte R, Dunn RL, et al. Short outcome health-differences between robotic and conventional radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2007;70(5):945–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bennett K. Robotic surgery: da Vinci and beyond. Bull RCS Eng. 2012;94(1):8–9.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Smith A, Smith J, Jayne DG. Telerobotics: surgery for the 21st century. Surgery (Oxford). 2006;24(2):74–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bolenz C, Freedland SJ, Hollenbeck BK, et al. Costs of radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol. 2014;65(2):316–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Garmo H, et al. Radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(10):932–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Comploj E, Pycha A. Experience with radical perineal prostatectomy in the treatment of localised prostate cancer. Ther Adv Urol. 2012;4(3):125–31.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wroński S. Radical perineal prostatectomy – the contemporary resurgence of a genuinely minimally invasive procedure: procedure outline. Comparison of the advantages, disadvantages, and outcomes of different surgical techniques of treating organ-confined prostate cancer (PCa). A literature review with special focus on perineal prostatectomy. Cent European J Urol. 2012;65(4):188–95.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mitsui Y, Yasumoto H, Anjiki H, et al. Hybrid procedure using perineal and abdominal approaches for radical prostatocystectomy: initial experience with 16 select cases. Springerplus. 2013;2:348.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Tan PH, Cheng L, Srigley JR, et al. Review: International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens. Working group 5: surgical margins. Mod Pathol. 2011;24:48–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Epstein JI. Evaluation of radical prostatectomy capsular margins of resection. The significance of margins designated as negative, closely approaching, and positive. Am J Surg Pathol. 1990;14:626–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Epstein JI, Sauvageot J. Do close but negative margins in radical prostatectomy specimens increase the risk of postoperative progression? J Urol. 1997;157:241–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Epstein JI, Partin AW, Sauvageot J, et al. Prediction of progression following radical prostatectomy. A multivariate analysis of 721 men with long-term follow-up. Am J Surg Pathol. 1996;20:286–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Saeedi Y, Pop M, Jacqmin D. [Salvage radical prostatectomy for brachytherapy failure: preliminary results]. Prog Urol. 2014;24(5):266–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Grampsas SA, Miller GJ, Crawford ED. Salvage radical prostatectomy after failed transperineal cryotherapy: histologic findings from prostate whole-mount specimens correlated with intraoperative transrectal ultrasound images. Urology. 1995;45(6):936–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Leonardo C, Franco G, De Nunzio C, et al. Salvage laparoscopic radical prostatectomy following high-intensity focused ultrasound for treatment of prostate cancer. Urology. 2012;80(1):130–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Stephenson AJ, Eastham JA. Role of salvage radical prostatectomy for recurrent prostate cancer after radiation therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:8198–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Leibovici D, Spiess PE, Heller L, et al. Salvage surgery for locally recurrent prostate cancer after radiation therapy: tricks of the trade. Urol Oncol. 2008;26(1):9–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bianco FJ, Scardino PT, Stephenson AJ, et al. Long-term oncologic results of salvage radical prostatectomy for locally recurrent prostate cancer after radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;62:448–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Chade DC, Eastham J, Graefen M, et al. Cancer control and functional outcomes of salvage radical prostatectomy for radiation-recurrent prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2012;61:961–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Abdollah F, Briganti A, Montorsi F, et al. Contemporary role of salvage lymphadenectomy in patients with recurrence following radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2014; pii: S0302-2838(14)00271-1. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2014.03.019. [Epub ahead of print] Review.

  26. Crain DS, Amling CL, Kane CJ. Palliative transurethral prostate resection for bladder outlet obstruction in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer. J Urol. 2004;171(2 Pt1):668–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Wilson JR, Urwin GH, Stower MJ. The role of percutaneous nephrostomy in malignant ureteric obstruction. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2005;87(1):21–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Chitale SV, Dcott-Barrett S, Ho ETS, Burgess NA. The management of ureteric obstruction secondary to malignant pelvic disease. Clin Radiol. 2002;57(12):1118–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Roosen JU, Klarskov OP, Mogensen P. Subcapsular versus total orchiectomy in the treatment of advanced prostate cancer: a randomized trial. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2005;39(6):464–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Klimo Jr P, Thompson CJ, Kestle JR, Schmidt MH. A meta-analysis of surgery versus conventional radiotherapy for the treatment of metastatic spinal epidural disease. Neuro Oncol. 2005;7:64–76.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Higdon ML, Higdon JA. Treatment of oncologic emergencies. Am Fam Physician. 2006;74:1873–80.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Cole JS, Patchell RA. Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7:459–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Penas–Prado M, Loghin ME. Spinal cord compression in cancer patients: review of diagnosis and treatment. Curr Oncol Rep. 2008;10:78–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. L’Espérance S, Vincent F, Gaudreault M, et al. Practice Guideline Series: treatment of metastatic spinal cord compression: CEPO review and clinical recommendations. Curr Oncol. 2012;19(6):e478–90.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Homerton University Hospital, London, UK

    Vinod H. Nargund PhD, FRCSEd, FRCSUrol, FEBU

Authors
  1. Vinod H. Nargund PhD, FRCSEd, FRCSUrol, FEBU
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vinod H. Nargund PhD, FRCSEd, FRCSUrol, FEBU .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Homerton University Hospital & Formerly St. Bartholomew's Hospital, London, United Kingdom

    Vinod H. Nargund

  2. Levine Cancer Institute, Carolinas HealthCare System, Charlotte, North Carolina, USA

    Derek Raghavan

  3. Radiation Oncology, Cedars Sinai Cancer Center, Los Angeles, California, USA

    Howard M. Sandler

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Nargund, V.H. (2015). Surgical Aspects of Prostate Cancer Management. In: Nargund, V., Raghavan, D., Sandler, H. (eds) Urological Oncology. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-482-1_46

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-482-1_46

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-85729-481-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-85729-482-1

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation