Report of Radical Prostatectomy at the Urology Department of the Hopital General de Grand Yoff (HOGGY) Pages 15-20

A.M. Mahamat1, M. Jalloh2, M. Ndoye2, C.H. Hounnasso2, S.T. Faye2, M. Mbodj2, L. Niang2, I. Labou2 and S.M. Gueye2

1University of N’Djaména and Hôpital General de Reference Nationale (HGRN), N’Djaména, Chad; 2University of Cheikh Anta Diop and Hôpital General de Grand Yoff (HOGGY) of Dakar, Dakar, Senegal

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12970/2310-984X.2016.04.01.4

Download PDF

Abstract: Goal: To show the importance of radical prostatectomy and to evaluate the carcinogenic and functional results of radical prostatectomy (RP) at the Department of Urology of the Hôpital General de Grand Yoff.
Patients and Methods: This is a retrospective descriptive study involving 52 patients that had prostate cancer and had gone through RP. The study was held at the Department of Urology of the Hôpital General de Grand Yoff in Dakar over a period of 9 years starting from 1st January 2005 to 31st December 2014. The parameters covered in this study included: Age, existence or non-existence of history of prostate cancer in siblings, circumstances of diagnosis, clinical examination, diagnostic data with histology, therapeutic aspects and prognosis. All data was analyzed using CSPro and EXCEL software with the level of significance at (p < 0.005). Results: The average age of our patients was 61.2 years, ranging between the ages of 50 years and 69 years. In total, 51 patients had a preoperative Gleason score. Amongst them, 26 patients had well differentiated tumors (3+3 =6) and 7 patients had poorly differentiated tumors (4+4 =8) whilst 18 patients showed intermediate tumor differentiation between the two preceding groups (3+4 =7).
Histological examination of the specimen among the patients with a preoperative Gleason score of 7 (3 + 4), only 4 of the predicted patients had a definite score of 7 (4 + 3) while 1 patient had a Gleason score of 8. Postoperative Gleason score was evaluated only in 23 of the patients. Post-operative complications included 30 cases of urinary incontinence (56%), one case of ED in 20 cases (37%) and ureteral-bladder stenosis in 4 cases (7%). Biochemical recurrence (BR) was found in 11 patients. We noted clinical recurrence (CR) in 4 of the patients. Among patients with an RB, the resection margins were positive in 2 patients and lymph node invasion in 2 patients. It was equally noted that there was a seminal vesicle invasion in 5 patients in the biochemical recurrence.
In the 31 patients being followed up, quality of life was evaluated. Among patients with erectile dysfunction, 15 patients (48.4%) had good erectile functioning while 16 patients (51.6%) were evaluated as satisfactory. Continence was good in 11 patients (38.7%), average in 16 patients (51.6%) and poor in 3 patients (9.7%).

Conclusion: Radical prostatectomy gives patients a better chance for cure. The proposition for a PSA of the patients over 50 years of age would increase early diagnosis and would improve the prognosis of the cancer.

Keywords: Prostate cancer, localized, radical prostatectomy and evolution. Read more