Impact of intraoperative frozen section analysis (NeuroSAFE) on oncologic and functional outcomes after radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Abstract
373 Background: The NeuroSAFE technique, which provides intraoperative frozen section analysis of the neurovascular bundles, aims to maximize nerve preservation during radical prostatectomy while maintaining oncologic safety. Its efficacy in reducing positive surgical margins (PSM) and improving postoperative functional outcomes remains uncertain. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were searched through January 2025. Eligible studies compared NeuroSAFE-assisted with conventional radical prostatectomy. The primary endpoint was PSM. Secondary endpoints included biochemical recurrence (BCR), urinary continence, and erectile function recovery. Pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random-effects models. Heterogeneity was assessed using I² statistics, and publication bias was evaluated with Egger’s and Begg’s tests. Results: Eleven studies involving 15,639 patients (7,244 NeuroSAFE; 8,395 control) were included. NeuroSAFE significantly reduced PSM (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.59–0.88, p=0.001; I²=76%). No significant difference in BCR was observed (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.43–1.56, p=0.53). NeuroSAFE improved functional recovery, with higher odds of urinary continence (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.09–2.20, p=0.014; I²=0%) and erectile function (OR 2.26, 95% CI 1.50–3.41, p<0.001; I²=71%). No significant publication bias was detected. Conclusions: NeuroSAFE significantly decreases positive surgical margins and improves postoperative continence and erectile recovery without compromising biochemical control. These findings support its selective implementation as a quality-enhancing adjunct in nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. Meta-analysis. Outcome Studies (n) Patients (NeuroSAFE / Control) Pooled OR (95% CI) p-value I² (%) Positive surgical margins 11 7,244 / 8,395 0.73 (0.59–0.88) 0.001 76 Biochemical recurrence 5 1,232 / 1,689 0.82 (0.43–1.56) 0.53 59 Urinary continence 4 599 / 1,803 1.55 (1.09–2.20) 0.014 0 Erectile function 4 630 / 1,791 2.26 (1.50–3.41) <0.001 71
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (15)
Caio Suartz
Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada
Pedro Henrique Souza Brito
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo (UNICID), São Paulo, Brazil
Ketlyn Assunção Galhardo
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Leonam Bringhenti
Universidade Federal do Paraná, Paraná, Brazil
Bianca Espadilha
Universidade Cidade de São Paulo (UNICID), São Paulo, Brazil
Roberto Iglesias Lopes
University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Walid Sharour
Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada
Walid Shabana
Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada
Marian Wettstein
Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada
Thalita Bento Talizin
University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Leonardo Oliveira Reis
Unicamp, Campinas, Brazil
Mauricio Cordeiro
Urology Department, Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Jose Mauricio Mota
Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
William Carlos Nahas
Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Leopoldo Alves Ribeiro-Filho
Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo (ICESP), Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil