Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 381
Filtrar
3.
JAMA Netw Open ; 7(8): e2429760, 2024 Aug 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39172448

RESUMEN

Importance: Initial management of intermediate-risk prostate cancer is evolving, with no clear recommendation for treatment. Data on utilization of active surveillance for patients with newly diagnosed intermediate-risk prostate cancer may help clarify emerging trends. Objective: To further characterize US national trends of initial management of intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer diagnosed from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2020. Eligible patients were diagnosed in US hospitals included in the National Cancer Database; National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk stratification guidelines were used to characterize as favorable vs unfavorable intermediate risk. Analysis was performed in September 2023. Exposure: Active surveillance vs intervention with surgery and/or radiation or no treatment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Temporal trends in demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic factors among men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer and their association with the use of active surveillance; further subgroup analysis was conducted for those with favorable vs unfavorable intermediate risk classification. Results: In total, 289 584 men diagnosed with intermediate-risk prostate cancer were identified from 2010 to 2020 (46 147 Black [15.9%], 230 071 White [79.5%]). Among patients, 153 726 (53.1%) underwent prostatectomy, 107 152 (37.0%) underwent radiotherapy, and 15 847 (5.5%) underwent active surveillance as initial treatment strategy. Overall, active surveillance quadrupled from 418 of 21 457 patients (2.0%) in 2010 to 2428 of 28 192 patients (8.6%) in 2020 for the entire cohort (P < .001). Active surveillance increased from 317 of 12 858 patients (2.4%) in 2010 to 2020 of 12 902 patients (13.5%) in 2020 in men with favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer (P < .001). In the unfavorable intermediate-risk cohort, active surveillance increased from 101 of 8181 patients (1.2%) in 2010 to 408 of 12 861 patients (3.1%) in 2020 (P < .001). On multivariable analysis, use of active surveillance was associated with increased age (age 70-80 years vs <50 years: odds ratio [OR], 3.09; 95% CI, 2.66-3.59), lower Gleason score (3 + 3 vs 3 + 4: OR, 3.45; 95% CI, 3.25-3.66), early T stage (T2c vs T1a through T2a: OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.32-0.38), treatment at an academic center (community vs academic center: OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.67-0.78), higher level of education (communities with 21% or higher population without high school vs less than 7%: OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.67-0.79), insurance type (Medicare or other governmental service vs private: OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.07-1.16), proximity to treatment facility (greater than 120 miles vs less than 60 miles: OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.68-0.84), facility location (South Atlantic vs New England: OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.46-0.53), and lower income (less than $38 000 vs $63 000 or greater: OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.14-1.31). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings highlight increasing implementation of active surveillance in the initial management of intermediate risk prostate cancer. Prospective data with improved risk stratification incorporating genomics and digital pathology artificial intelligence as well as novel surveillance strategies may continue to better delineate optimal treatment recommendations in this patient population.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata , Espera Vigilante , Humanos , Masculino , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Neoplasias de la Próstata/epidemiología , Anciano , Espera Vigilante/estadística & datos numéricos , Espera Vigilante/tendencias , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Estudios de Cohortes , Factores de Riesgo
4.
Eur Urol Oncol ; 2024 Jul 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38972832

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The extent of prostate cancer found on biopsy, as well as prostate cancer grade and genomic tests, can affect clinical decision-making. The impact of these factors on the initial management approach and subsequent patient outcomes for men with favorable-grade prostate cancer has not yet been determined on a population level. Our objective was to explore the association of Decipher 22-gene genomic classifier (GC) biopsy testing on the initial use of conservative management versus radical prostatectomy (RP) and to determine the independent effect of GC scores on RP pathologic outcomes. METHODS: A total of 87 140 patients diagnosed with grade group 1 and 2 prostate cancer between 2016 and 2018 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry data were linked to GC testing results (2576 tested and 84 564 untested with a GC). The primary endpoints of interest were receipt of conservative management or RP, pathologic upgrading (pathologic grade group 3-5), upstaging (pathologic ≥T3b), and adverse pathologic features (pathologic upgrading, upstaging, or lymph node invasion). Multivariable logistic regressions quantified the association of variables with outcomes of interest. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: GC tested patients were more likely to have grade group 2 on biopsy (51% vs 46%, p < 0.001) and lower prostate-specific antigen (6.1 vs 6.3, p = 0.016). Conservative management increased from 37% to 39% and from 22% to 24% during 2016-2018 for the GC tested and untested populations, respectively. GC testing was significantly associated with increased odds of conservative management (odds ratio [OR] 2.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.9-2.4, p < 0.001). The distribution of biopsy GC risk was as follows: 45% low risk, 30% intermediate risk, and 25% high risk. In adjusted analyses, higher GC (per 0.1 increment) scores (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.17-1.31, p < 0.001) and percent positive cores (1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.12, p = 0.009) were significantly associated with the receipt of RP. A higher GC score was significantly associated with all adverse outcomes (pathologic upgrading [OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.12-1.49, p < 0.001], upstaging [OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.05-1.62, p = 0.020], and adverse pathology [OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.12-1.45, p < 0.001]). Limitations include observational biases associated with the retrospective study design. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Men who underwent GC testing were more likely to undergo conservative management. GC testing at biopsy is prognostic of adverse pathologic outcomes in a large population-based registry. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this population analysis of men with favorable-risk prostate cancer, those who underwent genomic testing at biopsy were more likely to undergo conservative management. Of men who initially underwent radical prostatectomy, higher genomic risk but not tumor volume was associated with adverse pathologic outcomes. The use of genomic testing at prostate biopsy improves risk stratification and may better inform treatment decisions than the use of tumor volume alone.

5.
JNCI Cancer Spectr ; 8(4)2024 Jul 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39051676

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Mechanisms underlying racial and ethnic disparities in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) vs open radical prostatectomy (ORP) are unclear. We sought to test 2 physician-level hypotheses: 1) Segregated Treatment and 2) Differential Treatment. METHODS: This observational study used the New York State Cancer Registry linked to discharge records and included patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer from October 1, 2008 to December 31, 2018. For hypothesis 1, we examined the association between patient race and ethnicity and treating surgeon RARP use (high-use surgeons, low-use surgeons, and surgeons at non-RARP facilities). For hypothesis 2, we determined the association between patient race and ethnicity and receipt of RARP when matching on treating surgeon, age, year of procedure, and Gleason group. We explored the role of insurance in both analyses. RESULTS: This study included 18 926 patients (8.0% Hispanic, 16.9% non-Hispanic Black, 75.1% non-Hispanic White), with a mean age of 60.4 ± 7.1 years. Compared with non-Hispanic White patients, Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black patients had higher odds of being treated by low-RARP-use surgeons (odds ratio [OR] = 2.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.20 to 3.88; OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.06 to 2.94, respectively) and by surgeons at non-RARP facilities (OR = 4.19, 95% CI = 2.18 to 8.07; OR = 4.60, 95% CI = 2.58 to 8.23, respectively). In the matched cohorts, Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black patients were less likely to receive RARP than non-Hispanic White patients (OR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.62 to 0.98; OR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.57 to 1.00, respectively). These associations were partially attenuated after accounting for insurance. CONCLUSIONS: Racial and ethnic disparities in RARP use are related to patients being treated by different surgeons and treated differently by the same surgeons. Identifying and addressing multilevel barriers to equitable surgical treatment is needed to reduce disparities among prostate cancer patients.


Asunto(s)
Negro o Afroamericano , Disparidades en Atención de Salud , Hispánicos o Latinos , Prostatectomía , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Población Blanca , Humanos , Masculino , Prostatectomía/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/etnología , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/etnología , Población Blanca/estadística & datos numéricos , Hispánicos o Latinos/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Negro o Afroamericano/estadística & datos numéricos , New York , Cirujanos/estadística & datos numéricos , Etnicidad/estadística & datos numéricos , Grupos Raciales/estadística & datos numéricos , Sistema de Registros , Clasificación del Tumor , Seguro de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos
6.
Cancers (Basel) ; 16(11)2024 May 29.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38893178

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: PSMA PET has emerged as a "gold standard" imaging modality for assessing prostate cancer metastases. However, it is not universally available, and this limits its impact. In contrast, whole-body MRI is much more widely available but misses more lesions. This study aims to improve the interpretation of whole-body MRI by comparing false negative scans retrospectively to PSMA PET. METHODS: This study was a retrospective sub-analysis of a prospectively collected database of patients who participated in a clinical trial of PSMA PET/MRI comparing PSMA PET and whole-body MRI from 2018-2021. Subjects whose separately read PSMA PET and MRI diagnostic reports showed discrepancies ("false negative" MRI cases) were selected for sub-analysis. The cases were reviewed by the same attending radiologist who originally read the scans. The radiologist noted specific features on MRI indicating metastatic disease that were initially missed. RESULTS: Of 263 cases, 38 (14%) met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Six classes of mpMRI false negatives were identified: anatomically normal (18, 47%), atypical MRI appearance (6, 16%), mischaracterization (1, 3%), undercall (6, 16%), obscured (4, 11%), and no abnormality on MRI (3, 8%). Considering that the atypical and undercalled cases could have been adjusted in retrospect, and that 4 additional cases had positive lesions to the same extent and 11 further cases had disease confined to the pelvis, only 11 (4%) of the original 263 would have had disease outside of a conventional radiation treatment plan. CONCLUSION: Notably, almost 50% of the cases, including most lymph node metastases, were anatomically normal using standard criteria. This suggests that current anatomic criteria for evaluating prostate cancer lymph node metastases are not ideal, and there is a need for improved criteria. In addition, 32% of cases involved some element of human interpretive error, and, therefore, improving reader training may lead to more accurate results.

7.
Urology ; 188: 11-17, 2024 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38692493

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To assess the outcomes, total healthcare utilization, and cost savings for same-day discharge (SDD) vs inpatient robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy (RARN). METHODS: We compared 146 RAPNs and 65 RARNs consecutively performed as SDD (RAPN=21, RARN=9) vs inpatient (RAPN=125, RARN=56) from April 2015 to May 2023 at two academic medical centers. We collected baseline demographics, perioperative characteristics, and 30-day complications. We applied the Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing analysis to compare total costs of RAPN and PARN throughout the cycle of care, including inpatient vs SDD. RESULTS: Baseline demographics and comorbidities were similar between patients undergoing inpatient vs SDD RAPN and RARN. One Clavien-Dindo grade II complication (3.3%) requiring readmission due to wound infection for antibiotics occurred after SDD RAPN; no complications occurred after SDD RARN. Two unscheduled office or emergency department visits (6.7%) occurred after SDD RAPN for surgical-site infection and urinary retention. SDD vs inpatient RAPN and RARN demonstrated a $3091 (18%) and $4003 (25%) overall cost reduction, respectively. CONCLUSION: SDD RAPN and RARN result in cost savings of 18%-25% without a difference in complications, and thereby improves value-based care for appropriately selected patients.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Renales , Nefrectomía , Alta del Paciente , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Nefrectomía/economía , Nefrectomía/métodos , Nefrectomía/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/efectos adversos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias Renales/cirugía , Neoplasias Renales/economía , Alta del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Estudios Retrospectivos , Ahorro de Costo/estadística & datos numéricos , Factores de Tiempo , Hospitalización/economía , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/economía , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Pacientes Internos/estadística & datos numéricos
8.
Urol Pract ; 11(3): 538-546, 2024 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38640417

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The use of active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer is increasing, and racial disparities have been identified in its implementation. We investigated differences by race and ethnicity in the utilization and intensity of AS by race and ethnicity among older men with low- and favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer, with particular focus on the integration of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) into AS protocols. METHODS: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results and Medicare fee-for-service linked database, we identified a cohort of men diagnosed between 2010 and 2017 with low- or favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer. The odds of receiving AS were compared by patient race and ethnicity using multivariable logistic regression models, while the rates of usage of PSA tests, biopsy, and mpMRI within 2 years of diagnosis among men on AS were assessed using multivariable Poisson regression models. RESULTS: Our cohort included 33,542 men. The proportion of men with low-risk disease who underwent AS increased from 29.5% in 2010 to 51.7% in 2017, while the proportion among men with favorable intermediate disease grew from 11.4% to 17.2%. Hispanic (odds ratio [OR] = 0.68, 95% CI 0.58-0.79) and non-Hispanic Black men (OR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.68-0.89) were less likely to receive AS than non-Hispanic White men for low-risk disease, while non-Hispanic Black men were more likely to receive AS for favorable intermediate disease (OR = 1.21, 95% CI 1.04-1.39). Non-Hispanic Black men receiving AS underwent prostate MRI at a lower rate compared to non-Hispanic White men, regardless of whether they had low-risk (incidence rate ratio = 0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.97) or favorable intermediate-risk (incidence rate ratio = 0.61, 95% CI 0.44-0.83) disease, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The overall adoption of AS for low-risk prostate cancer increased among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. However, a significant disparity exists for non-Hispanic Black men, as they exhibit lower rates of AS utilization. Moreover, non-Hispanic Black men are less likely to have access to novel technologies, such as mpMRI, as part of their AS protocols.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata , Espera Vigilante , Anciano , Humanos , Masculino , Negro o Afroamericano , Medicare , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Blanco , Hispánicos o Latinos
13.
Eur Urol Focus ; 2024 Apr 26.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38677913

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There is an absence of high-level evidence comparing oncologic endpoints for partial gland ablation, and most series use prostate-specific antigen (PSA) rather than biopsy endpoints. Our aim was to compare oncologic outcomes between partial gland cryoablation (PGC) and radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer. METHODS: This was a retrospective, single-center analysis of subjects treated with PGC (n = 98) or RP (n = 536) between January 2017 and December 2022 as primary treatment for intermediate-risk (Gleason grade group [GG] 2-3) prostate cancer. Oncologic endpoints included surveillance biopsies per protocol after PGC in comparison to serial PSA testing after RP. The primary outcome was treatment failure, defined as a need for any salvage treatment or development of metastatic disease. Treatment failure and survival analyses were conducted using Cox proportional-hazard regression and Kaplan Meier survival curves. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: After applying the inclusion/exclusion criteria, the PGC (n = 75) and RP (n = 298) groups were compared. PGC patients were significantly older (71 vs 64 yr; p < 0.001), but there were no differences in PSA, biopsy GG, or treatment year between the groups. The PGC group had higher rates of treatment failures at 24 mo (33% vs 11%; p < 0.001) and 48 mo (43% vs 14%; p < 0.001). One PGC patient (2.1%) and one RP patient (0.7%) developed metastases by 48-mo follow-up (p = 0.4). On adjusted analysis, PGC was associated with a higher risk of treatment failure (hazard ratio 4.6, 95% confidence interval 2.7-7.9; p < 0.001). Limitations include observational biases associated with the retrospective study design. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first comparative effectiveness study of cancer control outcomes for PGC versus RP. The results demonstrate an almost fivefold higher risk of treatment failure with PGC during short-term follow-up. PATIENT SUMMARY: We compared cancer control outcomes for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated with partial gland cryoablation versus radical prostatectomy. We found that partial gland cryoablation had an almost fivefold higher risk of treatment failure. Men with prostate cancer should be counseled regarding this difference in treatment failure.

15.
Urology ; 186: 91-97, 2024 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38387509

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To compare clinically significant prostate cancer detection with TP-TBx utilizing software vs cognitive fusion. It is established that MRI prior to prostate biopsy improves detection of clinically significant cancer (csPCa, Grade Group ≥2). MRI/US fusion targeted biopsy via a transperineal approach (TP-TBx) is increasing in utilization due to the clean percutaneous approach that greatly reduces postbiopsy infection. However, the comparative effectiveness of formal software fusion over cognitive fusion remains under studied. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective multicenter study from June 2020 to July 2022 including age, race, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), prostate volume, PI-RADS, lesion size(s), number of cores sampled, indication (elevated PSA, prior negative, active surveillance) and anesthesia type. Surgeon preference determined use of cognitive (PrecisionPoint) vs software fusion techniques. Multivariable logistic regression determined factors associated with TP-TBx detection of csPCa. RESULTS: We identified 490 patients (201 cognitive, 289 software fusion) who underwent TP-TBx. Patient age, PSA, number of targets, and PI-RADS were similar (all P > .05). Software fusion TP-TBx had 4 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3-5] more (estimated median difference) systematic cores sampled. csPCa was detected in 44% of all patients. In adjusted analysis, cognitive vs software fusion was similar in detection of csPCa (odds ratio 1.46, 95% CI 0.82-2.58). CONCLUSION: Cognitive vs software fusion TP-TBx has similar csPCa detection, despite fewer systematic cores taken with cognitive fusion. The expense, additional time requirement, and similar outcomes of software fusion platforms confers higher value to cognitive TP-Bx.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata , Humanos , Masculino , Cognición , Biopsia Guiada por Imagen/métodos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Próstata/patología , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Programas Informáticos
16.
Eur Urol Open Sci ; 60: 36-43, 2024 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38375342

RESUMEN

Background and objective: There is insufficient evidence on the oncologic risks of testosterone therapy for men with prostate cancer managed with active surveillance. We carried out a retrospective study to assess the effect of testosterone therapy on oncologic outcomes for men on active surveillance for prostate cancer. Methods: Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked data were used to identify men diagnosed with prostate cancer from 2008 to 2017 who were managed with active surveillance and received testosterone (n = 167) or no testosterone (n = 6658) therapy. Outcomes included conversion from active surveillance to active treatment (radical prostatectomy, cryotherapy, radiation, or androgen deprivation therapy), prostate cancer-specific mortality, and overall mortality. Statistically significant factors on univariable analysis were included in a Cox proportional-hazards regression model for multivariable analysis. Key findings and limitations: The median age was 71 yr (interquartile range [IQR] 68-74) in the testosterone group and 72 yr (IQR 69-75) in the no-testosterone group, with corresponding median follow-up after prostate cancer diagnosis of 5.2 yr (IQR 3.4-7.8) and 4.7 yr (IQR 3.2-6.9). There were no prostate cancer-specific deaths in the testosterone group and 39 (0.6%) in the no-testosterone group. Testosterone therapy was not associated with conversion to active treatment (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46-0.97; p = 0.033) or overall mortality (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.68-1.53; p > 0.9). Conclusions and clinical implications: In the first population-based, nationally representative study of testosterone therapy for men on active surveillance for prostate cancer, testosterone therapy did not increase the risk of conversion to active therapy or worsen mortality. Prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings. Patient summary: For men on active surveillance for prostate cancer, we assessed the effect of testosterone therapy. We found that testosterone therapy did not increase the risk of proceeding to active therapy or of death from prostate cancer.

17.
Eur Urol ; 86(1): 61-68, 2024 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38212178

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The transrectal biopsy approach is traditionally used to detect prostate cancer. An alternative transperineal approach is historically performed under general anesthesia, but recent advances enable transperineal biopsy to be performed under local anesthesia. We sought to compare infectious complications of transperineal biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis versus transrectal biopsy with targeted prophylaxis. METHODS: We assigned biopsy-naïve participants to undergo transperineal biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis versus transrectal biopsy with targeted prophylaxis (rectal culture screening for fluoroquinolone-resistant bacteria and antibiotic targeting to culture and sensitivity results) through a multicenter, randomized trial. The primary outcome was post-biopsy infection captured by a prospective medical review and patient report on a 7-d survey. The secondary outcomes included cancer detection, noninfectious complications, and a numerical rating scale (0-10) for biopsy-related pain and discomfort during and 7-d after biopsy. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 658 participants were randomized, with zero transperineal versus four (1.4%) transrectal biopsy infections (difference -1.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.2%, 0.3%; p = 0.059). The rates of other complications were very low and similar. Importantly, detection of clinically significant cancer was similar (53% transperineal vs 50% transrectal, adjusted difference 2.0%; 95% CI -6.0, 10). Participants in the transperineal arm experienced worse periprocedural pain (0.6 adjusted difference [0-10 scale], 95% CI 0.2, 0.9), but the effect was small and resolved by 7-d. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Office-based transperineal biopsy is tolerable, does not compromise cancer detection, and did not result in infectious complications. Transrectal biopsy with targeted prophylaxis achieved similar infection rates, but requires rectal cultures and careful attention to antibiotic selection and administration. Consideration of these factors and antibiotic stewardship should guide clinical decision-making. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this multicenter randomized trial, we compare prostate biopsy infectious complications for the transperineal versus transrectal approach. The absence of infectious complications with transperineal biopsy without the use of preventative antibiotics is noteworthy, but not significantly different from transrectal biopsy with targeted antibiotic prophylaxis.


Asunto(s)
Profilaxis Antibiótica , Biopsia Guiada por Imagen , Perineo , Próstata , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Recto , Humanos , Masculino , Biopsia Guiada por Imagen/métodos , Biopsia Guiada por Imagen/efectos adversos , Anciano , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Recto/microbiología , Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética Intervencional , Estudios Prospectivos
18.
Urol Oncol ; 42(3): 67.e17-67.e24, 2024 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38212151

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Prostatic fascia-sparing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (PFS-RARP) has improved short-term postoperative continence compared to standard prostatectomy (S-RARP) but long-term differences remain unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred two S-RARP followed by 239 PFS-RARPs were performed by a single surgeon. Univariate analyses were performed with t-test, χ2, Wilcoxon rank sum, Fisher exact, and analysis of variance (ANOVA). Regression models analyzed associates of EPIC-CP scores and oncologic outcomes. Cox proportional hazards modeling assessed postoperative continence. Primary outcomes included patient-reported urinary incontinence (UI) via EPIC-CP and continence rates. Secondary outcomes included EPIC-CP scores, positive surgical margins (PSM), and biochemical recurrence (BCR). Perioperative outcomes and time to continence were measured. RESULTS: Median follow-up for PFS-RARP vs. S-RARP was 26 vs. 65 months. PFS-RARP demonstrated improved EPIC-CP UI and total scores at 24 months. On multivariate analysis, PFS-RARP was associated with improved EPIC-CP UI and total scores through 18 months, but not with PSM or BCR. PFS-RARP had a 39% and 66% reduced risk of incontinence using 0 and 0 to 1 pad-use definitions (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.39 - 0.95; HR:0.34, 95% CI 0.16 - 0.76). Continence returned faster with PFS-RARP (0 PPD: 91.0 days vs. 261 days, P < 0.001; 0-1 PPD: 32.7 days vs. 171 days, P < 0.001). There were no differences in PSM (35% vs. 25%, P = 0.064). There were more anterior PSM in PFS-RARP vs. S-RARP (47% vs. 26% P = 0.035), but no differences in BCR (16% vs. 22% P = 0.241). CONCLUSIONS: PFS-RARP improves continence and patient-reported QOL up to 24 months postoperatively without compromising oncologic outcomes.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Cirujanos , Incontinencia Urinaria , Masculino , Humanos , Calidad de Vida , Resultado del Tratamiento , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Prostatectomía/efectos adversos , Incontinencia Urinaria/etiología , Fascia
20.
Ann Surg Oncol ; 31(2): 1373-1383, 2024 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37880515

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine whether the differences in short-term outcomes between patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and those treated with open radical prostatectomy (ORP) differ by race and ethnicity. METHODS: This observational study used New York State Cancer Registry data linked to discharge records and included patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer during 2008-2018. We used logistic regression to examine the association between race and ethnicity (non-Hispanic White [NHW], non-Hispanic Black [NHB], Hispanic), surgical approach (RARP, ORP), and postoperative outcomes (major events, prolonged length of stay [pLOS], 30-day re-admission). We tested interaction between race and ethnicity and surgical approach on multiplicative and additive scales. RESULTS: The analytical cohort included 18,926 patients (NHW 14,215 [75.1%], NHB 3195 [16.9%], Hispanic 1516 [8.0%]). The average age was 60.4 years (standard deviation 7.1). NHB and Hispanic patients had lower utilization of RARP and higher risks of postoperative adverse events than NHW patients. NHW, NHB, and Hispanic patients all had reduced risks of adverse events when undergoing RARP versus ORP. The absolute reductions in the risks of major events and pLOS following RARP versus ORP were larger among NHB {relative excess risk due to interaction (RERI): major events -0.32 [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.71 to -0.03]; pLOS -0.63 [95% CI -0.98 to -0.35]) and Hispanic (RERI major events -0.27 [95% CI -0.77 to 0.09]; pLOS -0.93 [95% CI -1.46 to -0.51]) patients than among NHW patients. The interaction was absent on the multiplicative scale. CONCLUSIONS: RARP use has not penetrated and benefited all racial and ethnic groups equally. Increasing utilization of RARP among NHB and Hispanic patients may help reduce disparities in patient outcomes after radical prostatectomy.


Asunto(s)
Disparidades en el Estado de Salud , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Etnicidad , Prostatectomía/efectos adversos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/etnología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/efectos adversos , Anciano , Resultado del Tratamiento
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...