The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
Original Article
PreviousPrevious
Volume 347:790-796 September 12, 2002 Number 11
NextNext

Quality of Life after Radical Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting
Gunnar Steineck, M.D., Fred Helgesen, M.D., Jan Adolfsson, M.D., Paul W. Dickman, Ph.D., Jan-Erik Johansson, M.D., Bo Johan Norlén, M.D., Lars Holmberg, M.D., for the Scandinavian Prostatic Cancer Group Study Number 4

 Sign up for free e-toc
 

This Article
-Full Text
- PDF
-PDA Full Text
-PowerPoint Slide Set

Commentary
-Editorial
 by Walsh, P. C.
-Letters

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-PubMed Citation
ABSTRACT

Background We evaluated symptoms and self-assessments of quality of life in men with localized prostate cancer who participated in a randomized comparison between radical prostatectomy and watchful waiting.

Methods Between 1989 and 1999, a group of Swedish urologists randomly assigned men with localized prostate cancer to radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting. In this follow-up study, we obtained information from 326 of 376 eligible men (87 percent) concerning certain symptoms, symptom-induced distress, well-being, and the subjective assessment of quality of life by means of a mailed questionnaire.

Results Erectile dysfunction (80 percent vs. 45 percent) and urinary leakage (49 percent vs. 21 percent) were more common after radical prostatectomy, whereas urinary obstruction (e.g., 28 percent vs. 44 percent for weak urinary stream) was less common. Bowel function, the prevalence of anxiety, the prevalence of depression, well-being, and the subjective quality of life were similar in the two groups.

Conclusions The assignment of patients to watchful waiting or radical prostatectomy entails different risks of erectile dysfunction, urinary leakage, and urinary obstruction, but on average, the choice has little if any influence on well-being or the subjective quality of life after a mean follow-up of four years.


Source Information

From the Department of Oncology and Pathology (G.S., F.H., P.W.D.) and the Department of Medical Epidemiology (P.W.D.), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm; the Department of Urology and the Center for Assessment of Medical Technology, University Hospital, Örebro (F.H., J.-E.J.); Center for Surgical Sciences, Karolinska Institutet and Oncologic Center, Stockholm (J.A.); and the Department of Urology (B.J.N.) and the Department of Surgery, Regional Oncology Center (L.H.), University Hospital, Uppsala — all in Sweden.

Address reprint requests to Dr. Steineck at Clinical Cancer Epidemiology, Radiumhemmet, Karolinska Institutet, 17176 Stockholm, Sweden, or at gunnar.steineck{at}onkpat.ki.se.

Full Text of this Article


Related Letters:

Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting in Prostate Cancer
Blanker M. H., Bierma-Zeinstra S. M.A., Schouten B. W.V., Coen J. J., Zietman A. L., Shipley W. U., Gambacorti-Passerini C. B., Sala E. A., Sonpavde G., Stern S. D., Bill-Axelson A., Holmberg L.
Extract | Full Text | PDF  
N Engl J Med 2003; 348:170-171, Jan 9, 2003. Correspondence

This article has been cited by other articles:



HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.