Submited on: 10 Apr 2012 03:40:03 AM GMT
Published on: 10 Apr 2012 05:41:34 PM GMT

This paper was based upon the results of the audit of the first 50 patients who had undergone radical prostatectomy in our institution. Even if the patient who died is removed from the study this would not make any difference regarding the observation that it is only the patients in the high risk group who have a a great chance of PSA (Biochemical) failure. Infact analysis of the results when the patient who died is excluded from the study would still show a statistically significant difference between the groups.

What I would suggest is that individual Urological surgeons who undertake radical prostatectomy including Dr Ahmed F Kotb should audit there work to see if they would come to the saeme conclusion us. They can use the definition of PSA failure as PSA of 0.2 ng/ml with a second rising PSA. It is only if other authors find a discrepancy between their observations and ours that a large scale study would be indicated.


If statistical analysis indicate a statistical significant difference in outcome between the different risk stratification groups there is not an absolute need for a very large multi-centre study.