Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Whereas open radical prostatectomy is performed extraperitoneally, minimally invasive radical prostatectomy is typically performed within the peritoneal cavity. Our objective was to determine whether minimally invasive radical prostatectomy is associated with an increased risk of small bowel obstruction compared with open radical prostatectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS:In the U.S. Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database, we identified 14,147 men found to have prostate cancer from 2000 to 2008 treated by open (n = 10,954) or minimally invasive (n = 3193) radical prostatectomy. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine the impact of surgical approach on the diagnosis of small bowel obstruction, as well as the need for lysis of adhesions and exploratory laparotomy. RESULTS:During a median follow-up of 45 and 76 months, respectively, the cumulative incidence of small bowel obstruction was 3.7% for minimally invasive and 5.3% for open radical prostatectomy (p = 0.0005). Lysis of adhesions occurred in 1.1% of minimally invasive and 2.0% of open prostatectomy patients (p = 0.0003). On multivariable analysis, there was no significant difference between minimally invasive and open prostatectomy with respect to small bowel obstruction (HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.90, 1.52, p = 0.25) or lysis of adhesions (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.50, 1.40, p = 0.57). Limitations of the study include the retrospective design and use of administrative claims data. CONCLUSIONS:Relative to open radical prostatectomy, minimally invasive radical prostatectomy is not associated with an increased risk of postoperative small bowel obstruction and lysis of adhesions.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of the 2005 modification of the Gleason classification on risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe), 2,574 men assessed with the original Gleason classification and 1,890 men assessed with the modified Gleason classification, diagnosed between 2003 and 2007, underwent primary RP. Histopathology was reported according to the Gleason Grading Groups (GGG): GGG1 = Gleason score (GS) 6, GGG2 = GS 7(3 + 4), GGG3 = GS 7(4 + 3), GGG4 = GS 8 and GGG5 = GS 9-10. Cumulative incidence and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to assess difference in BCR. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of BCR was lower using the modified compared to the original classification: GGG2 (16% vs. 23%), GGG3 (21% vs. 35%) and GGG4 (18% vs. 34%), respectively. Risk of BCR was lower for modified versus original classification, GGG2 Hazard ratio (HR) 0.66, (95%CI 0.49-0.88), GGG3 HR 0.57 (95%CI 0.38-0.88) and GGG4 HR 0.53 (95%CI 0.29-0.94). CONCLUSION: Due to grade migration following the 2005 Gleason modification, outcome after RP are more favourable. Consequently, outcomes from historical studies cannot directly be applied to a contemporary setting. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;114:664-670. (c) 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

BACKGROUND:Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor (PDE5i) use is common for management of erectile dysfunction. Single-institution studies have reported conflicting data on the relationship between PDE5i use and biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer (BCR) after radical prostatectomy. OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the association between PDE5i use and BCR after radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy in a nationwide population-based cohort. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:This was a nested case-control study using the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden linked to the Prescribed Drug Register. Among men with localized prostate cancer who underwent primary radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy during 2006-2007 with 5 yr of follow-up, 293 had BCR after treatment (cases). For each case we identified 20 BCR-free controls (n=5767) using incidence density sampling. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS:Multivariable conditional logistic regression was used to examine the association between PDE5i use and BCR risk. Separate multivariable models including clinical variables for men undergoing prostatectomy or radiotherapy and including surgical pathology after prostatectomy were also analyzed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS:PDE5i use was not associated with BCR after radical prostatectomy (odds ratio [OR] 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-1.03) or radiation therapy (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.49-1.97) after adjusting for marital status, education, income, prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, Gleason score, and proportion of positive biopsies. Results were similar after additional adjustment for surgical pathology (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.64-1.16). Men whose cumulative number of PDE5i pills was above the median had a slightly lower BCR risk after prostatectomy in the clinical model, and no difference in BCR risk after adjustment for pathologic tumor features. CONCLUSIONS:Our results from a population-based cohort suggest that BCR risk is not higher among men using PDE5i after prostate cancer treatment. PATIENT SUMMARY:Erectile dysfunction medications are not associated with a higher risk of disease recurrence after prostate cancer treatment.