4.5 Article

Surgical margin status and its impact on prostate cancer prognosis after radical prostatectomy: a meta-analysis

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
卷 36, 期 11, 页码 1803-1815

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00345-018-2333-4

关键词

Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy; Positive surgical margin; Prognosis; Meta-analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and purpose Positive surgical margins (PSMs) correlate with adverse outcomes in numerous solid tumours. However, the prognostic value of PSMs in prostate cancer (PCa) patients who underwent radical prostatectomy remains unclear. Herein, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the association between PSMs and the prognostic value for biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and overall mortality (OM) in PCa patients. Materials and methods According to the PRISMA statement, online databases PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science were searched to identify relevant studies published prior to February 2018. The hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated to evaluate the relationship between PSMs and PCa. Results Ultimately, 32 cohort studies that met the eligibility criteria and involved 141,222 patients (51-65,633 per study) were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that PSMs were significantly predictive of poorer BRFS (HR = 1.35, 95% CI 1.28-1.48, p < 0.001), CSS (HR = 1.49, 95% CI 1.16-1.90, p = 0.001) and OS (HR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.20, p = 0.014). In addition, PSMs were significantly associated with higher risk of CSM (HR = 1.23, 95% CI 1.16-1.30, p < 0.001) and OM (HR = 1.09, 95% CI 1.02-1.16, p = 0.009) in patients with PCa. Conclusions Our study suggests that the presence of a histopathologic PSM is associated with the clinical outcomes BRFS, CSS, OS, CSM and OM in patients with PCa, and PSMs could serve as a poor prognostic factor for patients with PCa.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据