Lisa J. Kroon , Margaretha A. van der Slot , Roderick C.N. van den Bergh , Monique J. Roobol , Geert J.L.H. van Leenders
{"title":"根治性前列腺切除术中神经血管结构邻近冷冻切片检查(NeuroSAFE):系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Lisa J. Kroon , Margaretha A. van der Slot , Roderick C.N. van den Bergh , Monique J. Roobol , Geert J.L.H. van Leenders","doi":"10.1016/j.euo.2024.12.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and objective</h3><div>A standardized intraoperative frozen section analysis of the prostate resection margin adjacent to the neurovascular bundle according to the NeuroSAFE technique is performed to maximize nerve sparing during radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer (PCa). The aim of this review was to analyze oncological and functional outcomes of NeuroSAFE.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A systematic search of the Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases until July 2024 was performed. Studies were eligible if these included men undergoing RP with NeuroSAFE for PCa, and reported on oncological and/or functional outcomes. A cumulative analysis with random-effect models for oncological outcomes was conducted using Review Manager software, together with a narrative analysis of the procedure and functional outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Key findings and limitations</h3><div>We analyzed 14 studies with nine distinct patient populations; 7505 out of 15 446 patients underwent NeuroSAFE. The number of nerve-sparing procedures was higher for patients with NeuroSAFE than for controls in all studies. Cumulative analyses showed a statistically significantly lower risk of positive surgical margins (PSMs) in favor of NeuroSAFE (odds ratio [OR] 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51–0.91, I<sup>2</sup> = 79%) and no difference in 2-yr biochemical recurrence (BCR; OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.53–1.18, I<sup>2</sup> = 63%). All studies with control groups showed higher potency rates in the NeuroSAFE group; none reported significant difference in continence rates. Adverse events were scarce. Limitations of the studies include a lack of randomization resulting in a selection bias; the overall risk of bias judgment ranged from low to serious.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions and clinical implications</h3><div>We present the first systematic review on NeuroSAFE during RP. The level of evidence is weak. The increased rate of nerve-sparing surgery, reduced PSMs, similar BCR, and low adverse event rates imply that NeuroSAFE is an oncologically safe technique. NeuroSAFE seems to improve functional outcomes, especially potency, but results of randomized trials are awaited.</div></div><div><h3>Patient summary</h3><div>We know that for patients with prostate cancer who undergo an operation to remove the prostate, sparing the nerve bundles next to each side of the prostate improves continence and erectile function. In this literature review, we evaluated a technique (NeuroSAFE) that aids surgeons in deciding whether they can spare these nerve bundles safely while still operating radically, for example, remove all cancer. We found that the technique is oncologically safe. Furthermore, the impact on potency appears promising but needs further study.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12256,"journal":{"name":"European urology oncology","volume":"8 5","pages":"Pages 1365-1374"},"PeriodicalIF":9.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Neurovascular Structure-adjacent Frozen-section Examination (NeuroSAFE) During Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Lisa J. Kroon , Margaretha A. van der Slot , Roderick C.N. van den Bergh , Monique J. Roobol , Geert J.L.H. van Leenders\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.euo.2024.12.008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background and objective</h3><div>A standardized intraoperative frozen section analysis of the prostate resection margin adjacent to the neurovascular bundle according to the NeuroSAFE technique is performed to maximize nerve sparing during radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer (PCa). The aim of this review was to analyze oncological and functional outcomes of NeuroSAFE.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A systematic search of the Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases until July 2024 was performed. Studies were eligible if these included men undergoing RP with NeuroSAFE for PCa, and reported on oncological and/or functional outcomes. A cumulative analysis with random-effect models for oncological outcomes was conducted using Review Manager software, together with a narrative analysis of the procedure and functional outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Key findings and limitations</h3><div>We analyzed 14 studies with nine distinct patient populations; 7505 out of 15 446 patients underwent NeuroSAFE. The number of nerve-sparing procedures was higher for patients with NeuroSAFE than for controls in all studies. Cumulative analyses showed a statistically significantly lower risk of positive surgical margins (PSMs) in favor of NeuroSAFE (odds ratio [OR] 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51–0.91, I<sup>2</sup> = 79%) and no difference in 2-yr biochemical recurrence (BCR; OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.53–1.18, I<sup>2</sup> = 63%). All studies with control groups showed higher potency rates in the NeuroSAFE group; none reported significant difference in continence rates. Adverse events were scarce. Limitations of the studies include a lack of randomization resulting in a selection bias; the overall risk of bias judgment ranged from low to serious.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions and clinical implications</h3><div>We present the first systematic review on NeuroSAFE during RP. The level of evidence is weak. The increased rate of nerve-sparing surgery, reduced PSMs, similar BCR, and low adverse event rates imply that NeuroSAFE is an oncologically safe technique. NeuroSAFE seems to improve functional outcomes, especially potency, but results of randomized trials are awaited.</div></div><div><h3>Patient summary</h3><div>We know that for patients with prostate cancer who undergo an operation to remove the prostate, sparing the nerve bundles next to each side of the prostate improves continence and erectile function. In this literature review, we evaluated a technique (NeuroSAFE) that aids surgeons in deciding whether they can spare these nerve bundles safely while still operating radically, for example, remove all cancer. We found that the technique is oncologically safe. Furthermore, the impact on potency appears promising but needs further study.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12256,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European urology oncology\",\"volume\":\"8 5\",\"pages\":\"Pages 1365-1374\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European urology oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2588931124002906\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2588931124002906","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景和目的:在根治性前列腺切除术(RP)治疗前列腺癌(PCa)时,根据NeuroSAFE技术对邻近神经血管束的前列腺切除缘进行标准化术中冷冻切片分析,以最大限度地保留神经。本综述的目的是分析NeuroSAFE的肿瘤和功能结果。方法:系统检索截至2024年7月的Medline、Embase和Web of Science数据库。如果这些研究包括接受RP和NeuroSAFE治疗PCa的男性,并报告了肿瘤和/或功能结果,则这些研究是合格的。使用Review Manager软件对肿瘤预后的随机效应模型进行累积分析,并对手术过程和功能结果进行叙述性分析。主要发现和局限性:我们分析了9个不同患者群体的14项研究;15446例患者中有7505例接受了NeuroSAFE治疗。在所有研究中,NeuroSAFE患者的神经保留手术数量高于对照组。累积分析显示,NeuroSAFE治疗的手术切界阳性(psm)风险显著降低(优势比[OR] 0.68, 95%可信区间[CI] 0.51-0.91, I2 = 79%), 2年生化复发率(BCR;或0.79,95% ci 0.53-1.18, i2 = 63%)。所有对照组的研究都显示,NeuroSAFE组的效力率更高;没有报道尿失禁率有显著差异。不良事件很少。研究的局限性包括缺乏随机化导致选择偏倚;偏见判断的总体风险从低到严重不等。结论和临床意义:我们首次对RP期间的NeuroSAFE进行了系统回顾。证据不足。神经保护手术率的增加、psm的减少、相似的BCR和低不良事件发生率意味着NeuroSAFE是一种肿瘤学上安全的技术。NeuroSAFE似乎可以改善功能结果,尤其是效力,但随机试验的结果还有待观察。患者总结:我们知道,对于接受前列腺切除手术的前列腺癌患者,保留前列腺两侧的神经束可以改善他们的失禁和勃起功能。在这篇文献综述中,我们评估了一项技术(NeuroSAFE),该技术可以帮助外科医生决定他们是否可以安全地保留这些神经束,同时仍然进行彻底的手术,例如,切除所有的癌症。我们发现这项技术在肿瘤学上是安全的。此外,对效力的影响似乎很有希望,但需要进一步研究。
Neurovascular Structure-adjacent Frozen-section Examination (NeuroSAFE) During Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Background and objective
A standardized intraoperative frozen section analysis of the prostate resection margin adjacent to the neurovascular bundle according to the NeuroSAFE technique is performed to maximize nerve sparing during radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer (PCa). The aim of this review was to analyze oncological and functional outcomes of NeuroSAFE.
Methods
A systematic search of the Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases until July 2024 was performed. Studies were eligible if these included men undergoing RP with NeuroSAFE for PCa, and reported on oncological and/or functional outcomes. A cumulative analysis with random-effect models for oncological outcomes was conducted using Review Manager software, together with a narrative analysis of the procedure and functional outcomes.
Key findings and limitations
We analyzed 14 studies with nine distinct patient populations; 7505 out of 15 446 patients underwent NeuroSAFE. The number of nerve-sparing procedures was higher for patients with NeuroSAFE than for controls in all studies. Cumulative analyses showed a statistically significantly lower risk of positive surgical margins (PSMs) in favor of NeuroSAFE (odds ratio [OR] 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51–0.91, I2 = 79%) and no difference in 2-yr biochemical recurrence (BCR; OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.53–1.18, I2 = 63%). All studies with control groups showed higher potency rates in the NeuroSAFE group; none reported significant difference in continence rates. Adverse events were scarce. Limitations of the studies include a lack of randomization resulting in a selection bias; the overall risk of bias judgment ranged from low to serious.
Conclusions and clinical implications
We present the first systematic review on NeuroSAFE during RP. The level of evidence is weak. The increased rate of nerve-sparing surgery, reduced PSMs, similar BCR, and low adverse event rates imply that NeuroSAFE is an oncologically safe technique. NeuroSAFE seems to improve functional outcomes, especially potency, but results of randomized trials are awaited.
Patient summary
We know that for patients with prostate cancer who undergo an operation to remove the prostate, sparing the nerve bundles next to each side of the prostate improves continence and erectile function. In this literature review, we evaluated a technique (NeuroSAFE) that aids surgeons in deciding whether they can spare these nerve bundles safely while still operating radically, for example, remove all cancer. We found that the technique is oncologically safe. Furthermore, the impact on potency appears promising but needs further study.
期刊介绍:
Journal Name: European Urology Oncology
Affiliation: Official Journal of the European Association of Urology
Focus:
First official publication of the EAU fully devoted to the study of genitourinary malignancies
Aims to deliver high-quality research
Content:
Includes original articles, opinion piece editorials, and invited reviews
Covers clinical, basic, and translational research
Publication Frequency: Six times a year in electronic format