Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Adherence to the lymphadenectomy recommendations of the 2009 clinical guidelines in the 2010 National Prostate Cancer Registry.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the adherence to the recommendations of the 2009 clinical guidelines in the implementation of lymphadenectomy during radical prostatectomy and analysis of the variables that influence this decision in the 2010 National Prostate Cancer Registry.

MATERIAL AND METHOD: Analysis of 1,272 patients who underwent prostatectomy in 25 national hospitals. Patient classification according to the pathological node-positive (pN+) risk criteria included in the clinical guidelines of the European Association of Urology (EAU) and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). Calculation of the raw agreement and index of agreement kappa. Logistic regression to assess the predictors in the decision to perform lymphadenectomy.

RESULTS: Lymphadenectomy was performed on 225 (17.7%) patients, with a variability among centers of 0-62.2% (p<.001). There was lymphocytic invasion (pN+) in 17 (7.5%) patients. The raw agreement with the EAU-09 clinical guidelines was .672 (.48-.96 in the various centers), and the kappa index was .289. The raw agreement with the NCCN-09 clinical guidelines was.814 (.51-1 in the various centers), and the kappa index was .228. In the multivariate analysis, the independent predictors for performing lymphadenectomy were the Gleason score, the clinical stage, the prostate-specific antigen, the hospital center and the surgical approach route to prostatectomy (all P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS: In our study, adherence to the recommendations of the clinical guidelines on the implementation of lymphadenectomy was moderate. When deciding on lymphadenectomy, the determinants (in addition to the classic clinical variables) were the approach route and the hospital where the prostatectomy was performed.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app