Extended versus limited pelvic lymph node dissection during bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy and its effect on continence and erectile function recovery: long-term results and trifecta rates of a comparative analysis.

To assess continence and erectile function (EF) recovery of extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND) versus limited PLND (lPLND) after bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy (BNSRP).

Consecutive prostate cancer (PCa) patients undergoing BNSRP were stratified according to D'Amico into two groups: low-risk-PCa lPLND (obturator) and intermediate-/high-risk-PCa ePLND (obturator, external iliac artery, internal iliac artery, common iliac artery).

Continence (no pad/one safety pad) and EF (IIEF-5 ≥ 17) recovery were assessed. Patients with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors, neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapy, positive lymph nodes or positive surgical margins were excluded.

From January 2007 to May 2012, a total 966 consecutive patients were included. Four hundred and sixty patients met the inclusion/exclusion criteria: 262 patients had ePLND and 198 patients had lPLND. Mean number of lymph nodes was 20. 4 (range 10-65) and 4. 7 (range 0-10), respectively (p < 0. 001). Continence and spontaneous EF recovery after 12 months were 89. 7 versus 93. 4 % and 40. 4 versus 47. 5 %, respectively (all p > 0. 05). Patient age at surgery (p = 0. 001), preoperative EF (p < 0. 001) and pathological tumor stage (p = 0. 008), but not ePLND (p = 0. 561), were independent predictors of EF recovery. No association was detected for continence recovery. Seven-year BCR-free survival for pT2 PCa was 100 and 94. 8 % in lPLND and ePLND, respectively (p = 0. 011). For pT3 PCa, this was 94. 7 and 81. 2 %, respectively (p = 0. 287). At 2 years, the trifecta of continence, potency and recurrence freedom was achieved in 47. 5 and 44. 1 % in lPLND and ePLND, respectively (p = 0. 451).

ePLND is not associated with increased risk of postoperative incontinence or erectile dysfunction. Only patient age at surgery, preoperative EF and pathological tumor stage represent predictors of EF recovery.

World journal of urology. 2015 Sep 29 [Epub ahead of print]

Georgios Hatzichristodoulou, Stefan Wagenpfeil, Gudrun Wagenpfeil, Tobias Maurer, Thomas Horn, Kathleen Herkommer, Marie Hegemann, Jürgen E Gschwend, Hubert Kübler

Department of Urology, Technical University of Munich, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. Institute for Medical Biometry, Epidemiology and Medical Informatics, Saarland University Hospital, Homburg/Saar, Germany. , Institute for Medical Biometry, Epidemiology and Medical Informatics, Saarland University Hospital, Homburg/Saar, Germany. , Department of Urology, Technical University of Munich, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. , Department of Urology, Technical University of Munich, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. , Department of Urology, Technical University of Munich, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. , Department of Urology, Technical University of Munich, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. , Department of Urology, Technical University of Munich, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. , Department of Urology, Technical University of Munich, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.

PubMed

E-Newsletters

Newsletter subscription

Free Daily and Weekly newsletters offered by content of interest

The fields of GU Oncology and Urology are rapidly advancing. Sign up today for articles, videos, conference highlights and abstracts from peer-review publications by disease and condition delivered to your inbox and read on the go.

Subscribe