Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Impact of nerve sparing on surgical margins and biochemical recurrence: results from the SEARCH database

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases volume 12, pages 172–176 (2009)Cite this article

Abstract

The effects of nerve sparing on the risk of positive surgical margins (PSMs) and biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP) remain controversial. We examined data from 1018 men treated by RP between 1988 and 2006 at five centers in the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database. Neither bilateral nor unilateral nerve-sparing techniques were associated with a higher risk of PSM; on multivariate analysis of individual sides, the risk of PSM on either side was not increased by nerve sparing on either side. The risk for biochemical recurrence was not affected by bilateral or unilateral nerve sparing. When used on appropriately selected patients, nerve sparing does not increase the probability of PSM or biochemical recurrence after RP.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Walsh PC, Donker PJ . Impotence following radical prostatectomy: insight into etiology and prevention. J Urol 1982; 128: 492–497.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Smith DS, Catalona WJ, Herschman JD . Longitudinal screening for prostate cancer with prostate-specific antigen. JAMA 1996; 276: 1309–1315.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ohori M, Scardino PT . Localized prostate cancer. Curr Probl Surg 2002; 39: 833–957.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Epstein JI . Pathologic assessment of the surgical specimen. Urol Clin North Am 2001; 28: 567–594.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Han M, Partin AW, Pound CR, Epstein JI, Walsh PC . Long-term biochemical disease-free and cancer-specific survival following anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy: the 15-year Johns Hopkins experience. Urol Clin North Am 2001; 28: 555–565.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Freedland SJ, Amling CL, Dorey F, Kane CJ, Presti Jr JC, Terris MK et al. Race as an outcome predictor after radical prostatectomy: results from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital (SEARCH) database. Urology 2002; 60: 670–674.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cox DR . Regression models and life tables. J Roy Stat Soc 1972; 34: 187–220.

    Google Scholar 

  8. D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Schultz D, Schnall M, Tomaszewski JE et al. A multivariate analysis of clinical and pathological factors that predict for prostate specific antigen failure after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Urol 1995; 154: 131–138.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Swindle P, Eastham JA, Ohori M, Kattan MW, Wheeler T, Maru N et al. Do margins matter? The prognostic significance of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 2005; 174: 903–907.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Blute ML, Bostwick DG, Bergstralh EJ, Slezak JM, Martin SK, Amling CL et al. Anatomic site-specific positive margins in organ-confined prostate cancer and its impact on outcome after radical prostatectomy. Urology 1997; 50: 733–739.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Simon MA, Kim S, Soloway MS . Prostate specific antigen recurrence rates are low after radical retropubic prostatectomy and positive margins. J Urol 2006; 175: 140–145.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Freedland SJ, Aronson WJ, Presti JC, Kane CJ, Terris MK, Elashoff D et al. Should a positive surgical margin following radical prostatectomy be pathological stage T2 or T3? Results from the SEARCH database. J Urol 2003; 169: 2142–2146.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Connolly SS, O'Malley KJ, O'Brien A, Kelly DG, Mulvin DW, Quinlan DM . Can prostate biopsies predict suitability for nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy? Scand J Urol Nephrol 2004; 38: 216–220.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Obek C, Louis P, Civantos F, Soloway MS . Comparison of digital rectal examination and biopsy results with the radical prostatectomy specimen. J Urol 1999; 161: 494–499.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ward JF, Zincke H, Bergstralh EJ, Slezak JM, Myers RP, Blute ML . The impact of surgical approach (nerve bundle preservation versus wide local excision) on surgical margins and biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2004; 172: 1328–1332.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sofer M, Hamilton-Nelson KL, Schlesselman JJ, Soloway MS . Risk of positive margins and biochemical recurrence in relation to nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20: 1853–1858.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Palisaar RJ, Noldus J, Graefen M, Erbersdobler A, Haese A, Huland H . Influence of nerve-sparing (NS) procedure during radical prostatectomy (RP) on margin status and biochemical failure. Eur Urol 2005; 47: 176–184.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Katz R, Salomon L, Hoznek A, de la Taille A, Antiphon P, Abbou CC . Positive surgical margins in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the impact of apical dissection, bladder neck remodeling and nerve preservation. J Urol 2003; 169: 2049–2052.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Department of Veterans Affairs, National Institute of Health T32 Grant DK07790-01 (JLN, CJK), National Institute of Health R01CA100938 (WJA), NIH Specialized Programs of Research Excellence Grant P50 CA92131-01A1 (WJA), the Georgia Cancer Coalition (MKT), the Department of Defense, Prostate Cancer Research Program, (SJF), and the American Urological Association Foundation Astellas Rising Star in Urology Award (SJF).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, San Francisco School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA

    J L Nelles

  2. Department of Surgery, Veterans Administration Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA

    S J Freedland

  3. Division of Urologic Surgery, Department of Surgery and Duke Prostate Center, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA

    S J Freedland

  4. Department of Pathology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA

    S J Freedland

  5. Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, USA

    J C Presti Jr

  6. Department of Surgery, Urology Section, Veterans Administration Medical Center, Palo Alto, CA, USA

    J C Presti Jr

  7. Department of Surgery, Veterans Administration Medical Center, Augusta, GA, USA

    M K Terris

  8. Section of Urology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, GA, USA

    M K Terris

  9. Department of Surgery, Urology Section, Veterans Administration Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    W J Aronson

  10. Department of Urology, UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    W J Aronson

  11. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA

    C L Amling

  12. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of California, San Diego Medical Center, San Diego, CA, USA

    C J Kane

  13. Moores UCSD Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA, USA

    C J Kane

Authors
  1. J L Nelles
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S J Freedland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J C Presti Jr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M K Terris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. W J Aronson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. C L Amling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. C J Kane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C J Kane.

Additional information

Conflicts of interest/Disclosure

Views and opinions of, and endorsements by the author(s) do not reflect those of the US Army or the Department of Defense.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nelles, J., Freedland, S., Presti, J. et al. Impact of nerve sparing on surgical margins and biochemical recurrence: results from the SEARCH database. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 12, 172–176 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2008.40

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2008.40

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links