Search

Background: Laparoscopic prostatectomy (LRP) may activate clotting system influencing the risk of perioperative thrombosis in patients with prostate cancer. Moreover, different anaesthetic techniques can also modify coagulant factors. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate the effects on pro- and anti-coagulant and fibrinolytic factors of two established types of anaesthesia in patients with prostate cancer undergoing elective LRP., Methods: 102 patients with primary prostate cancer, who underwent conventional LRP or robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP), were studied and divided into 2 groups to receive total intravenous anesthesia with target-controlled infusion (TIVA-TCI) or balanced inhalation anaesthesia (BAL) prior to surgery. Before the induction of anaesthesia (T0), 1 hr (T1) and 24 hrs post-surgery (T2), some pro-coagulant factors, fibronolysis markers, p-selectin and haemostatic system inhibitors were evaluated., Results: Both TIVA-TCI and BAL patients showed a marked and significant increase in pro-coagulant factors and consequent reduction in haemostatic system inhibitors in the early post operative period (p ≤ 0.004 for each markers). Use of RALP showed a significant increase in prothrombotic markers as compared to LRP. In TIVA patients undergoing LRP, a significant reduction of p-selectin levels between T0 and T2 (p = 0.001) was observed as compared to BAL, suggesting a better protective effect on platelet activation of anaesthetic agents used for TIVA., Conclusions: Both anaesthetic techniques significantly seem to increase the risk of thrombosis in prostate cancer patients undergoing LRP, mainly when the robotic device was utilized, encouraging the use of a peri-operative thromboembolic prophylaxis in these patients.

Purpose: Because of the lack of conclusive and well-conducted randomized studies, the optimal therapy for prostate tumors remains controversial. The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare the results of radical surgery vs. a conservative approach such as external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) plus androgen deprivation therapy using an intent-to-treat analysis on two pretreatment defined, concurrently treated, high-risk patient populations., Methods and Materials: Between January 2003 and December 2007, 162 patients with high-risk prostate cancer underwent an EBRT plus androgen deprivation therapy program at the RT department of our institute. In the same period, 122 patients with the same high-risk disease underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) at the urologic department of our institute. Patients with adverse pathologic factors also underwent adjuvant EBRT with or without androgen deprivation therapy. The primary endpoint was freedom from biochemical failure., Results: The two groups of high-risk patients were homogeneous in terms of freedom from biochemical failure on the basis of the clinical T stage, biopsy Gleason score, and initial prostate-specific antigen level. The median follow-up was 38.6 and 33.8 months in the EBRT and RP groups, respectively. The actuarial analysis of the freedom from biochemical failure showed a 3-year rate of 86.8% and 69.8% in the EBRT and RP group, respectively (p = .001). Multivariate analysis of the whole group revealed the initial prostate-specific antigen level and treatment type (EBRT vs. RP) as significant covariates., Conclusion: This retrospective intention-to-treat analysis showed a significantly better outcome after EBRT than after RP in patients with high-risk prostate cancer, although a well-conducted randomized comparison would be the best procedure to confirm these results.