Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28077116›Full record

ArticleBMC urology2017

Quality of life and functional outcome after infravesical desobstruction and HIFU treatment for localized prostate cancer.

G Hatiboglu, I V Popeneciu, M Deppert, J Nyarangi-Dix, B Hadaschik, M Hohenfellner, D Teber, S Pahernik

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC urology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

G HatibogluDepartment of Urology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. gencay.hatiboglu@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
I V PopeneciuDepartment of Urology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
M DeppertDepartment of Urology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
J Nyarangi-DixDepartment of Urology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
B HadaschikDepartment of Urology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
M HohenfellnerDepartment of Urology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
D TeberDepartment of Urology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
S PahernikDepartment of Urology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Heidelberg University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo evaluate quality of life, functional and oncological outcome after infravesical desobstruction and HIFU treatment for localized prostate cancer.

methodsOne hundred thirty-one patients, treated with TURP and HIFU in a single institution were followed up for oncological and functional outcome. Oncological outcome was quantified by biochemical recurrence free survival using the Stuttgart and Phoenix criteria. Quality of life was assessed by usage of standardized QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PR25 questionnaires. In addition, functional questionnaires such as IPSS and IIEF-5 were used. Complications were assessed by the Clavien-Dindo classification.

resultsOne hundred thirty-one patients with a mean age of 72.8 years (SD: 6.0) underwent HIFU for prostate cancer (29.0% low risk, 58.8% intermediate risk, 12.2% high risk). PSA nadir was 0.6 ng/ml (SD: 1.2) after a mean of 4.6 months (SD: 5.7). Biochemical recurrence free survival defined by Stuttgart criteria was 73.7%, 84.4% and 62.5% for low-, intermediate- and high-risk patients after 22.2 months. Complications were grouped according to Clavien-Dindo and occurred in 10.7% (grade II) and 11.5% (grade IIIa) of cases. 35.1% of patients needed further treatment for bladder neck stricture. Regarding incontinence, 14.3%, 2.9% and 0% of patients had de novo urinary incontinence grade I°, II° and III° and 3.8% urge incontinence due to HIFU treatment. Patients were asked for the ability to have intercourse: 15.8%, 58.6% and 66.7% of patients after non-, onesided and bothsided nervesparing procedure were able to obtain sufficient erection for intercourse, respectively. Regarding quality of life, mean global health score according to QLQ-C30 was 69.4%.

conclusionHIFU treatment for localized prostate cancer shows acceptable oncological safety. Quality of life after HIFU is better than in the general population and ranges within those of standard treatment options compared to literature. HIFU seems a safe valuable treatment alternative for patients not suitable for standard treatment.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeTransurethral Resection of ProstateUltrasound, High-Intensity Focused, TransrectalAgedHumansMaleProspective StudiesProstatic NeoplasmsRecovery of FunctionTreatment OutcomeUrinary Bladder Neck ObstructionHIFUOutcomeQuality of life

Identifiers

PMID28077116
PMCPMC5225650
OpenAlexW2578873561

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.