Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Surgical Management of Localized and Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Urologic Oncology

  • 299 Accesses

Abstract

Localized prostate cancer can be managed with different treatment options based on the risk of progression of the disease and the patient morbidities and preferences. The most accepted treatment options include watchful waiting, external beam radiation therapy, brachytherapy, cryosurgery, high-intensity focused ultrasound, and radical prostatectomy. Radical prostatectomy is associated with excellent oncological outcomes in the localized setting but also with a variable degree of functional adverse events, mainly impotence and incontinence. Modification of the surgical technique with preservation of the neurovascular bundles improves postoperative sexual outcomes and continence. The advent of minimally invasive surgery has contributed to the emergence of many studies investigating the potential benefits on oncological and functional outcomes.

While surgery used to be offered mainly in the low-risk setting and rarely to high-risk patients, it has recently gained importance in the latter group, sometimes as part of a multimodal approach. The main advantages over other treatment options are the pathologic confirmation of the primary tumor grade and the regional staging provided with the pelvic lymph node dissection.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abdollah F, et al. Comparison of mortality outcomes after radical prostatectomy versus radiotherapy in patients with localized prostate cancer: a population-based analysis. Int J Urol. 2012;19(9):836–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Abern MR, et al. The impact of pathologic staging on the long-term oncologic outcomes of patients with clinically high-risk prostate cancer. Cancer. 2014;120(11):1656–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Akakura K, et al. A randomized trial comparing radical prostatectomy plus endocrine therapy versus external beam radiotherapy plus endocrine therapy for locally advanced prostate cancer: results at median follow-up of 102 months. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2006;36(12):789–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Albertsen PC, et al. Long-term survival among men with conservatively treated localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 1995;274(8):626–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Alsaid B, et al. Tridimensional computer-assisted anatomic dissection of posterolateral prostatic neurovascular bundles. Eur Urol. 2010;58(2):281–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Alsaid B, et al. Division of autonomic nerves within the neurovascular bundles distally into corpora cavernosa and corpus spongiosum components: immunohistochemical confirmation with three-dimensional reconstruction. Eur Urol. 2011;59(6):902–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Artibani W, et al. Learning curve and preliminary experience with da Vinci-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Urol Int. 2008;80(3):237–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Aus G, Hugosson J, Norlén L. Long-term survival and mortality in prostate cancer treated with noncurative intent. J Urol. 1995;154(2 Pt 1):460–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bader P et al. Is a limited lymph node dissection an adequate staging procedure for prostate cancer? J Urol. 2002;168(2):514–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beyer B, et al. A feasible and time-efficient adaptation of NeuroSAFE for da Vinci robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2014;66(1):138–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bill-Axelson A, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in localized prostate cancer: the scandinavian prostate cancer group-4 randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100(16):1144–54.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bill-Axelson A, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(18):1708–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bolla M, et al. Long-term results with immediate androgen suppression and external irradiation in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer (an EORTC study): a phase III randomized trial. Lancet. 2002;360(9327):103–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boorjian SA, et al. Long-term outcome after radical prostatectomy for patients with lymph node positive prostate cancer in the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol. 2007;178(3 Pt 1):864–70; discussion 870–1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boorjian SA, et al. Long-term survival after radical prostatectomy versus external-beam radiotherapy for patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Cancer. 2011;117(13):2883–91.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Briganti A, et al. Identifying the best candidate for radical prostatectomy among patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2012;61(3):584–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burkhard FC, et al. Nerve sparing open radical retropubic prostatectomy – does it have an impact on urinary continence? J Urol. 2006;176(1):189–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carver BS, et al. Long-term outcome following radical prostatectomy in men with clinical stage T3 prostate cancer. J Urol. 2006;176(2):564–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Catarin MVG, et al. The role of membranous urethral afferent autonomic innervation in the continence mechanism after nerve sparing radical prostatectomy: a clinical and prospective study. J Urol. 2008;180(6):2527–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cooperberg MR, et al. High-risk prostate cancer in the United States, 1990–2007. World J Urol. 2008;26(3):211–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Daly T et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011; Issue 12. Art. No.:CD007234.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Carlo F, et al. Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes: a systematic review. Urol Int. 2014;93(4):373–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Di Pierro GB, et al. A prospective trial comparing consecutive series of open retropubic and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in a centre with a limited caseload. Eur Urol. 2011;59(1):1–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Droz JP, et al. Background for the proposal of SIOG guidelines for the management of prostate cancer in senior adults. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2010;73(1):68–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dubbelman YD, Dohle GR, Schröder FH. Sexual function before and after radical retropubic prostatectomy: a systematic review of prognostic indicators for a successful outcome. Eur Urol. 2006;50(4):711–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eastham JA, et al. Risk factors for urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 1996;156(5):1707–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ficarra V, Novara G, Artibani W, et al. Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol. 2009a;55(5):1037–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ficarra V, Novara G, Fracalanza S, et al. A prospective, non-randomized trial comparing robot-assisted laparoscopic and retropubic radical prostatectomy in one European institution. BJU Int. 2009b;104(4):534–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ficarra V, Novara G, Ahlering TE, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2012a;62(3):418–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ficarra V, Novara G, Rosen RC, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2012b;62(3):405–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Freedland SJ, et al. Radical prostatectomy for clinical stage T3a disease. Cancer. 2007;109(7):1273–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Furukawa J, et al. Oncologic outcome of radical prostatectomy as monotherapy for men with high-risk prostate cancer. Curr Urol. 2016;9(2):67–72.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Ganzer R, et al. Topographical anatomy of periprostatic and capsular nerves: quantification and computerised planimetry. Eur Urol. 2008;54(2):353–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Guillonneau B, Vallancien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris technique. J Urol. 2000;163(6):1643–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haglind E, et al. Urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction after robotic versus open radical prostatectomy: a prospective, controlled, nonrandomised trial. Eur Urol. 2015;68(2):216–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heesakkers J et al. Pathophysiology and contributing factors in postprostatectomy incontinence: a review. Eur Urol. 2017;71(6):936–944.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidenreich A, Varga Z, von Knobloch R. Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: high incidence of lymph node metastasis. J Urol. 2002;167(4):1681–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heidenreich A, Ohlmann CH, Polyakov S. Anatomical extent of pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2007;52(1):29–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu C-Y, et al. Outcome of surgery for clinical unilateral T3a prostate cancer: a single-institution experience. Eur Urol. 2007;51(1):121–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • James N, et al. Docetaxel and/or zoledronic acid for hormone-naïve prostate cancer: first survival results from STAMPEDE. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:5001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson E, et al. Long-term quality-of-life outcomes after radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting: the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group-4 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(9):891–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Joniau S, et al. Radical prostatectomy in very high-risk localized prostate cancer: long-term outcomes and outcome predictors. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2012;46(3):164–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Joniau S, et al. Mapping of pelvic lymph node metastases in prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2013;63(3):450–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kaiho Y, et al. Intraoperative electrophysiological confirmation of urinary continence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2005;173(4):1139–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kane CJ, et al. Changing nature of high risk patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2007;177(1):113–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kaushik D, et al. Oncological outcomes following radical prostatectomy for patients with pT4 prostate cancer. Int Braz J Urol. 2016;42(6):1091–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kim SC, et al. Factors determining functional outcomes after radical prostatectomy: robot-assisted versus retropubic. Eur Urol. 2011;60(3):413–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krambeck AE, et al. Radical prostatectomy for prostatic adenocarcinoma: a matched comparison of open retropubic and robot-assisted techniques. BJU Int. 2009;103(4):448–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lepor H. Selecting candidates for radical prostatectomy. Rev Urol. 2000;2(3):182–9.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Litwin MS, et al. Differences in urologist and patient assessments of health related quality of life in men with prostate cancer: results of the CaPSURE database. J Urol. 1998;159(6):1988–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Loeb S, et al. What are the outcomes of radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer? Urology. 2010;76(3):710–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marien T, Sankin A, Lepor H. Sexual function/infertility factors predicting preservation of erectile function in men undergoing open radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol. 2009;181(4):1817–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Masterson TA, et al. The association between total and positive lymph node counts, and disease progression in clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 2006;175(4):1320–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Mattei A, et al. The template of the primary lymphatic landing sites of the prostate should be revisited: results of a multimodality mapping study. Eur Urol. 2008;53(1):118–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Michl U, et al. Nerve-sparing surgery technique, not the preservation of the neurovascular bundles, leads to improved long-term continence rates after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2016;69(4):584–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miller DC. Long-term outcomes among localized prostate cancer survivors: health-related quality-of-life changes after radical prostatectomy, external radiation, and brachytherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(12):2772–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell CR, et al. 20-year survival after radical prostatectomy as initial treatment for cT3 prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2012;110(11):1709–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen DP, et al. A specific mapping study using fluorescence sentinel lymph node detection in patients with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection. Eur Urol. 2016;70(5):734–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pagliarulo V. Detection of occult lymph node metastases in locally advanced node-negative prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(18):2735–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Palisaar R-J, et al. Influence of nerve-sparing (NS) procedure during radical prostatectomy (RP) on margin status and biochemical failure. Eur Urol. 2005;47(2):176–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Petrelli F, et al. Radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy in high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2014;12(4):215–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rabbani F, et al. Factors predicting recovery of erections after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2000;164(6):1929–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Recabal P, et al. Sexual function/infertility erectile function recovery after radical prostatectomy in men with high risk features. J Urol. 2016;196(2):507–13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Reeves F, et al. Preservation of the neurovascular bundles is associated with improved time to continence after radical prostatectomy but not long-term continence rates: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2015;68(4):692–704.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Resnick MJ, et al. Long-term functional outcomes after treatment for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(5):436–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Salonia A, et al. Prevention and management of postprostatectomy sexual dysfunctions. Part 1: choosing the right patient at the right time for the right surgery. Eur Urol. 2012;62(2):261–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schlomm T, et al. Neurovascular structure-adjacent frozen-section examination (NeuroSAFE) increases nerve-sparing frequency and reduces positive surgical margins in open and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: experience after 11 069 consecutive patients. Eur Urol. 2012;62(2):333–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schover LR, et al. Defining sexual outcomes after treatment for localized prostate carcinoma. Cancer. 2002;95(8):1773–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schuessler WW, et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short-term experience. Urology. 1997;50(6):854–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schumacher MC, et al. Good outcome for patients with few lymph node metastases after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2008;54(2):344–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shelley MD, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials of neo-adjuvant hormone therapy for localised and locally advanced prostate carcinoma. Cancer Treat Rev. 2009;35(1):9–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Steineck G, et al. Degree of preservation of the neurovascular bundles during radical prostatectomy and urinary continence 1 year after surgery. Eur Urol. 2015;67(3):559–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sweeney CJ, et al. Chemohormonal therapy in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(8):737–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Takenaka A, et al. Pelvic autonomic nerve mapping around the prostate by intraoperative electrical stimulation with simultaneous measurement of intracavernous and intraurethral pressure. J Urol. 2007;177(1):225–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tal R, et al. Erectile function recovery rate after radical prostatectomy: a meta-analysis. J Sex Med. 2009;6(9):2538–46.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Taplin M-E, et al. Intense androgen-deprivation therapy with abiraterone acetate plus leuprolide acetate in patients with localized high-risk prostate cancer: results of a randomized phase II neoadjuvant study. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(33):3705–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Touijer K, et al. Standard versus limited pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer in patients with a predicted probability of nodal metastasis greater than 1%. J Urol. 2007;178(1):120–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Touijer KA, et al. Long-term outcomes of patients with lymph node metastasis treated with radical prostatectomy without adjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy. Eur Urol. 2014;65(1):20–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • von Bodman C, et al. Intraoperative frozen section of the prostate decreases positive margin rate while ensuring nerve sparing procedure during radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2013;190(2):515–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh PC, Donker PJ. Impotence following radical prostatectomy: insight into etiology and prevention. J Urol. 1982;128(3):492–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ward J, et al. The impact of surgical approach (nerve bundle preservation versus wide local excision) on surgical margins and biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2004;172(4):1328–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ward JF, et al. Radical prostatectomy for clinically advanced (cT3) prostate cancer since the advent of prostate-specific antigen testing: 15-year outcome. BJU Int. 2005;95(6):751–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wawroschek F, et al. The influence of serial sections, immunohistochemistry, and extension of pelvic lymph node dissection on the lymph node status in clinically localized prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2003;43(2):1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weckermann D, et al. Sentinel lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: experience with more than 1,000 patients. J Urol. 2007;177(3):916–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wilt TJ, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(3):203–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Xylinas E, et al. Oncological control after radical prostatectomy in men with clinical T3 prostate cancer: a single-centre experience. BJU Int. 2009;103(9):1173–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yaxley JW, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus open radical retropubic prostatectomy: early outcomes from a randomised controlled phase 3 study. Lancet. 2016;388:1057–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yossepowitch O, et al. Radical prostatectomy for clinically localized, high risk prostate cancer: critical analysis of risk assessment methods. J Urol. 2007;178(2):493–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zelefsky MJ, et al. Metastasis after radical prostatectomy or external beam radiotherapy for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer: a comparison of clinical cohorts adjusted for case mix. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(9):1508–13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

    Antoni Vilaseca

  2. Department of Urology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

    Daniel P. Nguyen

  3. Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA

    Karim Touijer

  4. Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, USA

    Karim Touijer

Authors
  1. Antoni Vilaseca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel P. Nguyen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Karim Touijer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antoni Vilaseca .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. of Urology & Urologic Oncology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany

    Axel S. Merseburger

  2. Dept. of Urology, University of Regensburg St. Josef Medical Centre, Regensburg, Germany

    Maximilian Burger

Section Editor information

  1. Martini-Klinik am UKE GmbH, Martinistr. 52, D22047, Hamburg, Germany

    Thomas Steuber

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this entry

Cite this entry

Vilaseca, A., Nguyen, D.P., Touijer, K. (2017). Surgical Management of Localized and Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer. In: Merseburger, A., Burger, M. (eds) Urologic Oncology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42603-7_73-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42603-7_73-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-42603-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-42603-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference MedicineReference Module Medicine

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation