|
Options
for Radical Prostatectomy
|
Certified for 0.25
Category 1 AMA Credit
Sponsored by the University
of Alabama School of Medicine
Division of Continuing Medical Education
| Release Date:
February 27, 2006 |
Expiration
Date: February 27, 2009
|
| TARGET
AUDIENCE: |
| Primary
care physicians |
| ABSTRACT: |
| Several choices
for surgical treatment of prostate cancer are available,
including an open procedure, a laparoscopic prostatectomy,
or robotically assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. |
| OBJECTIVES: |
| The reader
will be aware of different techniques for radical prostatectomy
and their advantages and disadvantages. |
| Top of Page |
| FACULTY: |
|
Christopher
L. Amling, MD
Professor of Medicine
Department of Surgery, Division of Urology
The University of Alabama at Birmingham
Birmingham, Alabama
|
| DISCLOSURE: |
|
In accordance with the Accreditation
Council for Continuing Medical Education Standards for
Commercial Support, the faculty does not have any financial
affiliations to disclose.
|
| CME
PARTICIPATION: |
| To participate
in this program for CME credit, please review the objectives
before beginning the program. Complete the course and the
self-assessment test before February 27, 2009 to receive
CME credit. Your certificate will then be available online.
This process should take approximately 15 minutes. |
| ACCREDITATION: |
|
The University of Alabama School
of Medicine is accredited by the Accreditation Council
for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) to provide continuing
medical education for physicians.
The University of Alabama School
of Medicine designates this educational activity for a
maximum of 0.25 Category 1 credit toward the AMA Physician's
Recognition Award. Physicians should only claim credit
commensurate with the extent of their participation in
the activity.
The boards of nursing in many
states, including Alabama, recognize Category 1 continuing
medical education courses as acceptable activities for
the renewal of license to practice nursing.
|
| Top of Page |
| Introduction: |
While
minimally invasive surgical techniques have simplified
procedures such as cholecystectomy and hernia repair,
some complex procedures are difficult to adapt.
“Laparoscopic
radical prostatectomy, for example, is one of the most
technically challenging minimally invasive procedures,” explains
urologic oncologic surgeon Christopher L. Amling, MD,
new director of UAB’s Division of Urology. “The
prostate is located deep within the pelvis, surrounded
by a dense network of delicate blood vessels and nerves.
When surgeons began performing laparoscopic prostatectomy,
operating time averaged 6 to 10 hours, versus about 3
hours for standard open surgery."
|
|
Although
reduced blood loss, magnified view, shorter hospital stays,
and reduced postoperative pain are advantages of laparoscopic
prostatectomy, many surgeons found the steep learning curve
and lengthy operating times unacceptable, Amling says. “With
concurrent improvements in open radical prostatectomy, including
nerve-sparing techniques, most urologists choose not to perform
the considerably more difficult laparoscopic procedure.” |
|
Proven
Technique
|
|
Radical prostatectomy is an increasingly popular treatment
choice among the 230,000 American men diagnosed annually
with prostate cancer; about 40% now choose surgery over other
treatment options, which include watchful waiting, radiation
therapy, and hormone therapy.
Radical prostatectomy significantly reduces disease-related
mortality, Amling says. A recent Scandinavian trial randomized
695 men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer to either radical
prostatectomy or watchful waiting. After 8 years follow up,
surgery reduced cancer-specific mortality and frequency of
distant metastases by 50%, although overall survival between
the two groups was not significantly different (N Engl J
Med. 2002;347:781-789).
Surgeons perform open radical prostatectomy with one of
two approaches: retropubic or perineal. Long-term cancer
control and full recovery of continence and potency are the
ideal postprostatectomy outcomes, Amling says.
“Prostate cancer recurrence rates depend on serum
PSA level, cancer grade, and disease stage,” he says. “About
30% to 40% of men develop biochemical recurrence, defined
as detectable PSA levels following prostatectomy, but not
all these men have clinically significant cancer requiring
further treatment.” A recent study showed it may take
as long as 8 years for men with biochemical recurrence to
develop distant or metastatic disease, and another 5 years
for them to die from prostate cancer. Many older patients
die from other causes before this occurs.
“Open surgical modifications have reduced hemorrhaging
from the surrounding vasculature and allow surgeons to concentrate
on achieving clear surgical margins while sparing neurovascular
bundles,” he says. “These refinements allow more
men to maintain postsurgical potency and continence. Potency
is largely determined by age and preoperative erectile function.
Up to 80% of men in their 40s maintain potency after nerve-sparing
prostatectomy. When patients are in their 50s, that number
falls to 70%, and about 50% of patients older than 60 years
remain potent after prostatectomy.”
A large majority of men now achieve full
continence after prostatectomy. “More than 90% of men can expect postsurgical
continence, which is defined as not having to wear pads,” Amling
says, adding full recovery of continence and potency can
sometimes take as long as 2 years.
|
| Top of Page |
| Cutting-edge
Advance |
|
When performed by experienced surgeons, open radical prostatectomy
is often curative, but the invasive procedure requires a
lower midline incision and significant recovery time. Robotically
assisted surgery is a newer minimally invasive alternative,
offering all the advantages of the standard laparoscopic
procedure, while resolving many of its technical challenges.
UAB’s urologic surgical team, which includes Amling
and Donald A. Urban, MD, commands the da Vinci™ robotic
surgical system from a master console about 12 feet from
the patient. The system incorporates three multijoint robotic
arms: one arm, directed by a foot pedal, controls the binocular
endoscope; the others control two articulated arms that mimic
human wrist and hand movements and direct them to pencil-sized
microsurgical instruments. Unlike traditional laparoscopic
instruments, the da Vinci system translates large natural
movements to identical, but scaled down, micromovements at
the surgical site, increasing precision and accuracy.
The system immerses surgeons in the optical field, providing
a stereoscopic three-dimensional view with 10-fold magnification
of tissue planes and neurovascular bundles; standard laparoscopic
procedures are viewed two-dimensionally, Amling says.
“The system simulates the natural dexterity of surgeons’ fingers,
creating a virtual reality encounter that improves surgical
control and precision,” he says. “With robotically
assisted surgery, blood loss is less than 150 cc compared
with 500 cc to 700 cc with open prostatectomy. In addition,
much smaller incisions speed recovery times.” Catheterization
times can also be reduced with the less-invasive approach.
|
| Top of Page |
| Open
versus Robotic Surgery |
|
Although safety of robotically assisted laparoscopic radical
prostatectomy is well established, few randomized controlled
trials have compared open prostatectomy with robotically
assisted surgery, Amling says.
“During robotically assisted surgery, the abdomen
is inflated with gas, which can be associated with ileus.
Because open prostatectomy is performed outside the abdominal
cavity, robotic surgery may be associated with a longer delay
in return of bowel function than open prostatectomy in some
cases,” he says. “In other respects, intraoperative
and immediate postsurgical complications of the two procedures
appear similar.”
Mature 5- and 10-year follow-up data on prostate cancer
recurrence after robotic surgery are not yet available, but
Amling believes recurrence rates are equivalent.
“Open radical prostatectomy and the robotically assisted
procedure also appear to produce comparable return of continence
and potency, although we need more long-term data,” he
says. “Robotic surgery clearly results in less bleeding
and postoperative pain than conventional surgery. Many younger
men, who desire a quick return to normal activities, favor
the robotic technique. As larger series comparing procedures
for radical prostatectomy mature, I think data will show
at least equivalent primary outcomes measures, and perhaps,
some advantages to robotically assisted surgery.”
|
| Top of Page |
|
For
more information:
|
Dr.
Christopher Amling
1-800-UAB-MIST
mist@uabmc.edu
|
|
| Self-Assessment
Test: |
| To
apply for 0.25 Category 1 credit, complete the self-assessment
test and you should receive an online certificate immediately. |
|
To
take the test click
here!
|
|