Assessing the efficacy of pelvic floor muscle training and duloxetine on urinary continence recovery following radical prostatectomy: A randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Urinary incontinence (UI) can negatively impact quality of life (QoL) after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) and duloxetine are used to manage post-RARP UI, but their efficacy remains uncertain. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of PFMT and duloxetine in promoting urinary continence recovery (UCR) after RARP. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial involving patients with urine leakage after RARP from May 2015 to February 2018. Patients were randomized into 1 of 4 arms: (1) PFMT-biofeedback, (2) duloxetine, (3) combined PFMT-biofeedback and duloxetine, (4) control arm. PFMT consisted of pelvic muscle exercises conducted with electromyographic feedback weekly, for 3 months. Oral duloxetine was administered at bedtime for 3 months. The primary outcome was prevalence of continence at 6 months, defined as using ≤1 security pad. Urinary symptoms and QoL were assessed by using a visual analogue scale, and validated questionnaires. RESULTS: From the 240 patients included in the trial, 89% of patients completed 1 year of follow-up. Treatment compliance was observed in 88% (92/105) of patients receiving duloxetine, and in 97% (104/107) of patients scheduled to PFMT-biofeedback sessions. In the control group 96% of patients had achieved continence at 6 months, compared with 90% (p = 0.3) in the PMFT-biofeedback, 73% (p = 0.008) in the duloxetine, and 69% (p = 0.003) in the combined treatment arm. At 6 months, QoL was classified as uncomfortable or worse in 17% of patients in the control group, compared with 44% (p = 0.01), 45% (p = 0.008), and 34% (p = 0.07), respectively. Complete preservation of neurovascular bundles (NVB) (OR: 2.95; p = 0.048) was the only perioperative intervention found to improve early UCR. CONCLUSIONS: PFMT-biofeedback and duloxetine demonstrated limited impact in improving UCR after RP. Diligent NVB preservation, along with preoperative patient and disease characteristics, are the primary determinants for early UCR.

Tumour microenvironment and focal therapy for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Although most studies focus on the tumour component of prostate cancer (PCa), increasing attention is being paid to the prostatic tumour microenvironment (TME) and its role in diagnosis, prognosis, and therapy development. Herein, we review the prognostic capability of tumour and nontumour derived biomarkers, the immunomodulatory effects of focal therapy (FT) on TME, and its potential as part of a multidisciplinary approach to PCa treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: Tumour cells have always been the natural candidates to explore new biomarkers, but recent evidence highlights the prognostic contribution of TME cell markers. TME plays a critical role in PCa progression and tumours may escape from the immune system by establishing a microenvironment that suppresses effective antitumour immunity. It has been demonstrated that FT has an immunomodulatory effect and may elicit an immune response that can either favour or inhibit tumorigenesis. TME shows to be an additional target to enhance oncological control. SUMMARY: A better understanding of TME has the potential to reliably elucidate PCa heterogeneity and assign a prognostic profile in accordance with prostate tumour foci. The joint contribution of biomarkers derived from both tumour and TME compartments may improve patient selection for FT by accurately stratifying disease aggressivity according to the characteristics of tumour foci. Preclinical studies have suggested that FT may act as a TME modulator, highlighting its promising role in multimodal therapeutic management.

Available evidence on HIFU for focal treatment of prostate cancer: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common oncologic disease among men. Radical treatment with curative intent provides good oncological results for PCa survivors, although definitive therapy is associated with significant number of serious side-effects. In modern-era of medicine tissue-sparing techniques, such as focal HIFU, have been proposed for PCa patients in order to provide cancer control equivalent to the standard-of-care procedures while reducing morbidities and complications. The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the available evidence about focal HIFU therapy as a primary treatment for localized PCa. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature review of focal HIFU therapy in the MEDLINE database (PROSPERO: CRD42021235581). Articles published in the English language between 2010 and 2020 with more than 50 patients were included. RESULTS: Clinically significant in-field recurrence and out-of-field progression were detected to 22% and 29% PCa patients, respectively. Higher ISUP grade group, more positive cores at biopsy and bilateral disease were identified as the main risk factors for disease recurrence. The most common strategy for recurrence management was definitive therapy. Six months after focal HIFU therapy 98% of patients were totally continent and 80% of patients retained sufficient erections for sexual intercourse. The majority of complications presented in the early postoperative period and were classified as low-grade. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights that focal HIFU therapy appears to be a safe procedure, while short-term cancer control rate is encouraging. Though, second-line treatment or active surveillance seems to be necessary in a significant number of patients.

Impact of Focal Versus Whole Gland Ablation for Prostate Cancer on Sexual Function and Urinary Continence.

PURPOSE: Focal instead of whole gland ablation for prostate cancer has been proposed to decrease treatment morbidity. We sought to determine differences in erectile function and urinary continence after focal and whole gland ablation for prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2009 to 2018, 346 patients underwent high intensity focused ultrasound or cryotherapy for prostate cancer. Urinary continence was defined as use of no pads and sexual potency as enough erection for sexual penetration. Logistic regressions to treatment groups and covariates age, prostate specific antigen, International Society of Urological Pathology grading, prostate volume and energy modality were performed to access the effect of focal therapy in sexual potency and urinary continence after 3 and 12 months. IIEF-5 (International Index of Erectile Function) and I-PSS (International Prostate Symptom Score) questionnaires were evaluated. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for potential baseline differences between groups. RESULTS: After exclusion, 195 post-focal therapy and 105 post-whole gland therapy patients were included in analysis. No significant difference was seen in baseline I-PSS and IIEF-5 scores. In multivariate models focal therapy was the most important factor related to sexual potency at 3 (OR 7.7) and 12 months (OR 3.9). Median IIEF-5 score at 3 months was 12 and 5 (p <0.001), and at 12 months was 13 and 9 (p=0.04) in focal therapy and whole gland therapy groups, respectively. Focal therapy was the only factor related to continence (OR 0.7, p <0.001). Results remained significant after propensity score matching. CONCLUSIONS: Focal ablation instead of whole gland therapy is the most important factor related to better sexual and urinary continence recovery after high intensity focused ultrasound and cryotherapy for prostate cancer.

Association between Lesion Location and Oncologic Outcomes after Focal Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer Using Either High Intensity Focused Ultrasound or Cryotherapy.

PURPOSE: We assessed whether prostate cancer (PCa) location might affect oncologic outcomes after focal therapy (FT) for PCa. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 274 men receiving FT for PCa using either high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) or cryotherapy at a high volume center between 2009 and 2018. Survival analyses using Kaplan-Meier method were used to assess any additional treatment and radical treatment rates according to PCa location. Propensity-score match analysis was used to compare oncologic outcomes of HIFU vs cryotherapy according to PCa location. Covariates were prostate specific antigen, clinical stage, prostate volume, Gleason score, maximum cancer core length, percentage of positive cores and treatment modality. RESULTS: A total of 166 and 108 men received FT with HIFU and cryotherapy, respectively. Overall, 39% (106) and 31% (85) received at least an additional treatment and a radical treatment after FT, respectively, with a median followup of 51 months. At 36 months' followup, the rates of any additional treatment-free survival were 71%, 75%, and 69% for patients with basal, mid-prostate and apical disease, respectively (p=0.7). At multivariable logistic regression analysis, PCa location was not significantly associated with higher risk of either any additional treatment or radical treatment (all p >0.4). After matching, there was no difference between HIFU vs cryotherapy in terms of any additional treatment rates according to PCa location. CONCLUSIONS: The PCa location does not significantly affect the rate of failure after FT. The presence of an apical lesion should not be considered an exclusion criteria for FT. Both HIFU and cryotherapy likely achieve similar medium-term oncologic results regardless of PCa location.

Is the Toxicity of Salvage Prostatectomy Related to the Primary Prostate Cancer Therapy Received?

PURPOSE: To compare the toxicity profile and oncological outcome of salvage radical prostatectomy following focal therapy versus salvage radical prostatectomy after radiation therapies (external beam radiation therapy or brachytherapy). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data concerning all men undergoing salvage radical prostatectomy for recurrent prostate cancer after either focal therapy, external beam radiation therapy or brachytherapy were retrospectively collected from 4 high volume surgical centers. The primary outcome measure of the study was toxicity of salvage radical prostatectomy characterized by any 30-day postoperative Clavien-Dindo complication rate, 12-month continence rate and 12-month potency rate. The secondary outcome was oncological outcome after salvage radical prostatectomy including positive margin rate and 12-month biochemical recurrence rate. Biochemical recurrence was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods and significant differences were calculated using a log rank test. Median followup was 29.5 months. RESULTS: Between April 2007 and September 2018, 185 patients underwent salvage radical prostatectomy of whom 95 had salvage radical prostatectomy after focal therapy and 90 had salvage radical prostatectomy after radiation therapy (external beam radiation therapy or brachytherapy). Salvage radical prostatectomy after radiation therapy was associated with a significantly higher 30-day Clavien-Dindo I-IV complication rate (34% vs 5%, p <0.001). At 12 months following surgery, patients undergoing salvage radical prostatectomy after focal therapy had significantly better continence (83% pad-free vs 49%) while potency outcomes were similar (14% vs 11%). Men undergoing salvage radical prostatectomy after radiation therapy had a significantly higher stage and grade of disease together with a higher positive surgical margin rate (37% vs 13%, p=0.001). The 3-year biochemical recurrence after focal therapy was 35% compared to 32% after radiation therapy (p=0.76). In multivariable analysis, men undergoing salvage radical prostatectomy after focal therapy experienced a higher risk of biochemical recurrence (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.16-0.82, p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter study demonstrates the toxicity of salvage radical prostatectomy in terms of perioperative complications and long-term urinary continence recovery is dependent on initial primary prostate cancer therapy received with men undergoing salvage radical prostatectomy after focal therapy experiencing lower postoperative complication rates and better urinary continence outcomes.

Current state of image-guided focal therapy for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To review the current evidence regarding protocols and outcomes of image-guided focal therapy (FT) for prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS: A literature search of the latest published studies assessing primary FT for PCa was carried out in Medline and Cochrane library databases followed by a critical review. FT modalities, follow-up strategies, and oncological and toxicity outcomes were summarized and discussed in this review. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies with six different sources of energy met the inclusion criteria. A heterogeneity of patient selection, energy sources, treatment templates, and definitions of failure was found among the studies. While a third of patients may be found to have additional cancer burden over 3-5 years following FT, most patients will remain free of a radical procedure. The vast majority of patients maintain urinary continence and good erectile function after FT. Acute urinary retention is the most common complication, whilst severe complications remain rare. CONCLUSION: An increasing number of prospective studies with longer follow-up have been recently published. Acceptable cancer control and low treatment toxicity after FT have been consistently reported. Follow-up imaging and routine biopsy must be encouraged post-FT. While there is no reliable PSA threshold to predict failure after FT, reporting post-FT positive biopsies and retreatment rates appear to be standard when assessing treatment efficacy.

Focal Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer with Either High Intensity Focused Ultrasound or Cryoablation: A Single Institution Experience.

PURPOSE: We report oncologic outcomes in patients treated with focal therapy for prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed a single institution cohort of men with localized prostate cancer who received focal therapy using high intensity focused ultrasound or cryotherapy from 2009 to 2018. Focal therapy was offered for low or intermediate risk disease (prostate specific antigen less than 20 ng/ml, Gleason score 7 or less and clinical stage T2b or less). Patients with previous prostate cancer treatment or less than 6 months of followup were excluded from study. Failure was defined as local or systemic salvage treatment, a positive biopsy Gleason score of 7 or greater in-field or out-of-field in nontreated patients, prostate cancer metastasis or prostate cancer specific death. Cox regression analysis was done to identify independent predictors of failure after focal therapy. RESULTS: Of the 309 patients included in study 190 and 119 were treated with high intensity focused ultrasound and cryotherapy, respectively. Median followup was 45 months. At 1, 3 and 5 years the failure-free survival rate was 95%, 67% and 54%, and the radical treatment-free survival rate was 99%, 79% and 67%, respectively. The 5-year metastasis-free survival rate was 98% and no prostate cancer specific death was registered in this cohort. Before focal therapy a biopsy Gleason score of 7 (3 + 4) or greater (HR 2.4, p <0.001) and nadir prostate specific antigen (HR 2.2, p <0.001) were independently associated with failed focal therapy. In the salvage focal therapy setting in-field recurrence after primary focal therapy was associated with poorer failure-free survival (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of the men were free of focal therapy failure 5 years after treatment. Still, a significant proportion experienced recurrence at the midterm followup. The preoperative biopsy Gleason score and nadir prostate specific antigen were significantly associated with treatment failure.

Comparison of Initial Experience with Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging Cognitive Guided Micro-Ultrasound Biopsies versus Established Transperineal Robotic Ultrasound Magnetic Resonance Imaging Fusion Biopsies for Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: We compared cancer detection rates in patients who underwent magnetic resonance imaging cognitive guided micro-ultrasound biopsy vs robotic ultrasound magnetic resonance imaging fusion biopsy for prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Among 269 targeted biopsy procedures 222 men underwent robotic ultrasound magnetic resonance imaging fusion biopsy and 47 micro-ultrasound biopsy. Robotic ultrasound magnetic resonance imaging fusion biopsy was performed using the transperineal Artemis™ device while micro-ultrasound biopsy was performed transrectally with the high resolution ExactVu™ system. Random biopsies were performed in addition to targeted biopsy in both modalities. Prostate cancer detection rates and concordance between random and target biopsies were also assessed. RESULTS: Groups were comparable in terms of age, prostate specific antigen, prostate volume and magnetic resonance PI-RADS (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System) version 2 score. The micro-ultrasound biopsy group presented fewer biopsied cores in random and target approaches. In targeted biopsies micro-ultrasound biopsy cases presented higher detection of clinically significant disease (Gleason score greater than 6) than the robotic ultrasound magnetic resonance imaging fusion biopsy group (38% vs 23%, p=0.02). When considering prostate cancer detection regardless of Gleason score or prostate cancer detection by random+target biopsies, no difference was found between the groups. However, on a per core basis overall prostate cancer detection rates favored micro-ultrasound biopsy in random and targeted scenarios. In addition, the PRI-MUS (Prostate Risk Identification Using Micro-Ultrasound) score yielded by micro-ultrasound visualization was independently associated with improved cancer detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: In our initial experience micro-ultrasound biopsy featured a higher clinically significant prostate cancer detection rate in target cores than robotic ultrasound magnetic resonance imaging fusion biopsy, which was associated with target features in micro-ultrasound (PRI-MUS score). These findings reinforce the role of micro-ultrasound technology in targeted biopsies.

Complications, oncological and functional outcomes of salvage treatment options following focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and a comprehensive narrative review.

BACKGROUND: Whether focal therapy (FT) jeopardizes subsequent prostate cancer (PCa) salvage treatments, when needed, remains a major concern and is largely unknown. OBJECTIVES: To describe and report safety, oncological and functional outcomes of salvage treatments following PCa recurrence and/or persistence after FT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review on salvage treatments for PCa recurrence/persistence after FT was carried out according to the PRISMA guidelines using an 'a priori protocol'. A comprehensive literature review was also performed to investigate options to treat FT PCa recurrence/persistence that have not yet been reported after FT. RESULTS: Four retrospective series were included (n = 67 men); overall quality of the studies was low. Salvage treatments yielded 32.8% (n = 22 of 67) biochemical recurrence rate (BCR) after a 7-62-months mean follow-up. No cancer-related deaths occurred. Patients experienced acceptable complications (n = 12 patients; n = 8 Clavien 3) and rare severe incontinence (4.5% using > 2 pads/day). Erectile function (EF) was rarely assessed (62.8% no information available), being overall poor. Other salvage options have been reported following whole-gland ablation and include: (1) re-do ablation yielding worst BCR and EF but similar complications and continence compared to first line ablation; (2) salvage radiotherapy yielding 16.6-38.8% BCR and acceptable toxicity profile with urinary and EF being poorly assessed. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence is weak and limited to a few retrospective series. Oncological control is acceptable although it seems lower compared to a primary treatment setting. Functional outcomes are comparable to primary treatment with the exception of EF; overall, suggesting FT has little impact on subsequent salvage treatments. Future studies are needed to confirm the current findings.

HRQOL related to urinary diversion in Radical Cystectomy: a systematic review of recent literature.

INTRODUCTION: The health-related QoL is a patient-centered evaluation covering several aspects. This evaluation seems to be particularly important in patients submitted to radical cystectomy (RC) and urinary diversion with ileal conduit (IC) or a neobladder (NB). OBJECTIVE: Review all recent data comparing QoL outcomes after radical cystectomy with NB and IC diversions. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic search in PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement in December 2018. All articles published from January 01, 2012 to December 31, 2018, were included. A study was considered relevant if it compared QoL outcomes using validated questionnaires (EORTC QLQ C30, FACT-G, FACT-BL, FACT-VCI, and BCI). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: In 11 included studies, a total of 1389 participants were accounted (730 NB and 659 IC cases). The studies were conducted in 8 different countries, two were prospective, and none was randomized. There were two studies favoring results with a neobladder, 3 with incontinent diversion and 6 with no differences. The EORTC-QLQ-C30 was the most used instrument (5 studies) followed by FACT VCI and BCI (3 studies each). Given the heterogeneity of data and lack of prospective studies, a meta-analysis was not performed. CONCLUSION: No superiority of one urinary diversion was characterized. It seems that the choice must be individualized with an extensive preoperative orientation of the patient and their relatives. That will probably infl uence how the patient accepts the new condition.

Prostate cancer multifocality, the index lesion, and the microenvironment.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Most of focal therapies has addressed index lesion as the targeted tumour focus to treat localized prostate cancer (PCa), a multifocal disease. The interaction between tumour foci and host cells creates a tumour microenvironment (TME) which affects tumour growth, cellular proliferation, and PCa progression. This review aims to better understand the biology of cancer foci and their interaction with the prostatic microenvironment after focal therapy. RECENT FINDINGS: Index lesions are representative of PCa grade in low-risk patients, but the other foci of tumour, the satellite lesions, gain relevance in higher risk patients. Multiparametric MRI, guided biopsies and new biomarkers in combination are important to address PCa multifocality and to adequately select patients to focal therapy. Stromal, immune, and tumoural components are integrated in tumourigenesis and modified after the inflammation induced by focal therapy. SUMMARY: TME and inflammation play an important role in PCa progression, but further researches are necessary to understand how once protective components of prostate microenvironment become protumour elements and how inflammation induced by focal therapy can affect them. Learning how to modulate TME is an exploratory molecular field that can lead us to better manage PCa in both prevention and treatment scenarios.

Biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: what does it mean?

BACKGROUND: Radical prostatectomy (RP) has been used as the main primary treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) for many years with excellent oncologic results. However, approximately 20-40% of those patients has failed to RP and presented biochemical recurrence (BCR). Prostatic specific antigen (PSA) has been the pivotal tool for recurrence diagnosis, but there is no consensus about the best PSA threshold to define BCR until this moment. The natural history of BCR after surgical procedure is highly variable, but it is important to distinguish biochemical and clinical recurrence and to find the correct timing to start multimodal treatment strategy. Also, it is important to understand the role of each clinical and pathological feature of prostate cancer in BCR, progression to metastatic disease and cancer specific mortality (CSM). Review design: A simple review was made in Medline for articles written in English language about biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. OBJECTIVE: To provide an updated assessment of BCR definition, its meaning, PCa natural history after BCR and the weight of each clinical/pathological feature and risk group classifications in BCR, metastatic disease and CSM.

Effect of Prior Focal Therapy on Perioperative, Oncologic and Functional Outcomes of Salvage Robotic Assisted Radical Prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: We assessed the impact of focal therapy on perioperative, oncologic and functional outcomes in men who underwent salvage robotic assisted radical prostatectomy compared to primary robotic assisted radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Focal therapy was performed in patients presenting with Gleason score 3 + 3 or 3 + 4, clinical stage cT2a or less, serum prostate specific antigen 15 ng/ml or less, unilateral positive biopsy, maximum length of any positive core less than 10 mm and life expectancy greater than 10 years. Focal therapy was defined as target ablation of the index lesion plus a 1 cm safety margin in the normal ipsilateral prostatic parenchyma. The salvage group included 22 men who underwent salvage prostatectomy after focal therapy failure. The primary group was defined using matched pair 1:2 selection of 44 of 2,750 patients treated with primary prostatectomy. The primary and secondary end points were the between group differences in functional and oncologic outcomes, respectively. RESULTS: Complication rates were comparable (p >0.05). Pad-free probability was comparable between the groups at 1 and 2 years (p = 0.8). Recovery of erectile function was significantly lower after salvage robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (p = 0.008), which also showed a significantly lower probability of cumulative biochemical recurrence-free survival compared to primary robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (56.3% vs 92.4% at 2 years, p = 0.001). Salvage prostatectomy demonstrated a significantly increased risk of biochemical recurrence (HR 4.8, 95% CI 1.67-13.76, p = 0.004). Study limitations included the retrospective nature, the lack of randomization and the short followup. CONCLUSIONS: Salvage robotic assisted radical prostatectomy after focal therapy failure is feasible with acceptable complication rates. However, patients assigned to primary focal therapy should be advised about a poorer prognosis in terms of oncologic control and lower erectile recovery rates in case of a future salvage surgery.

Prostate cancer in Brazil and Latin America: epidemiology and screening.

INTRODUCTION: Prostate cancer is one of the tumors with higher incidence and mortality among men in the World. Epidemiological data are influenced by life expectancy of population, available diagnostic methods, correct collection of data and quality of health services. Screening of the disease is not standardized around the World. Up till now there is no consensus about the risks versus benefits of early detection. There are still missing data about this pathology in Latin America. OBJECTIVE: to revise current epidemiologic situation and early diagnosis policies of prostate cancer in Brazil and Latin America. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medline, Cochrane Library and SciELO databases were reviewed on the subject of epidemiology and screening of prostate cancer. Screening research was performed in websites on national public health organizations and Latin America. Screening recommendations were obtained from those governmental organizations and from Latin American urological societies and compared to the most prominent regulatory agencies and societies of specialists and generalists from around the World. RESULTS: Brazil and Latin America have a special position in relation to incidence and mortality of prostate cancer. In Brazil, it occupies the first position regarding incidence of cancer in men and the second cause of mortality. Central America has the highest rate of mortality of the continent with lower incidence/mortality ratios. Screening recommendations are very distinct, mainly among regulatory organs and urological societies. CONCLUSION: prostate cancer epidemiology is an important health public topic. Data collection related to incidence and mortality is still precarious, especially in less developed countries. It is necessary to follow-up long term screening studies results in order to conclude its benefits.

Urinary Symptoms Change and Quality of Life After Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To present the patient-reported quality of life (QoL) outcomes from a prospective, randomized controlled trial comparing the use of pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) and duloxetine after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). METHODS: We identified 213 men with organ-confined disease having post-RARP urinary incontinence who were randomly assigned to received PFMT, duloxetine, combined PFMT-duloxetine and pelvic floor muscle home exercises. Urinary symptoms burden was measured by marked clinical important difference improvement (MCID) defined by using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) difference of - 8 points (ΔIPSS ≤-8). QoL was assessed according to Visual Analog Scale (VAS), King's Health Questionnaire (KQH), and International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5). Multivariable regression analyses aimed to predict MCID, burden of urinary symptoms (IPSS ≥8), and patients reporting to be satisfied (IPSS QoL ≤2) or comfortable (VAS ≤1) post-RARP. RESULTS: Moderate to severe urinary symptoms decreased from 48% preoperatively to 40%, 34%, and 23% at 3, 6, and 12months post-RARP. After surgery, MCID improvement was observed in 19% of patients, and deterioration in 3.3%. Large prostate was the only factor associated to MCID (OR 1.03 [95%CI 1.01-1.05], P = .005). At 6months, patients reached the same degree of preoperative satisfaction. Neurovascular bundle preservation was the only predictor of being comfortable regarding urinary symptoms postoperatively (OR 12.8 [CI95% 1.47-111.7], P = .02 at 3months) and was also associated to higher median postoperative IIEF-5. CONCLUSION: Despite urinary incontinence following RARP, patients with larger prostates experience a reduction of lower urinary tract symptoms within a year, which subsequently elevates QoL. Furthermore, nerve-sparing surgery augments erectile function and urinary outcomes, shaping postoperative QoL.

Salvage Radical Prostatectomy for Recurrent Prostate Cancer Following First-line Nonsurgical Treatment: Validation of the European Association of Urology Criteria in a Large, Multicenter, Contemporary Cohort.

Salvage radical prostatectomy (sRP) is a potentially curative option for locally radiorecurrent prostate cancer (PCa) but is associated with significant morbidity. Therefore, the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines recommend restricting sRP to a favorable-prognosis group according to the EAU criteria, but these have been validated considering only biochemical recurrence (BCR). Our aim was to test these criteria in a large, multicenter, contemporary cohort. We retrospectively reviewed 1265 patients who underwent sRP at 14 referral centers (2000-2021), stratified by compliance with the EAU criteria. Our primary outcome was metastasis-free survival (MFS). We included 1030 men, of whom 221 (21.5%) fully met the EAU recommended criteria for sRP and 809 (78.5%) did not. The EAU-compliant group experienced more favorable pathological and functional outcomes (79% vs 63% wearing no pads at 1 yr; p < 0.001) and had significantly better MFS (90% vs 76% at 5 yr; p < 0.001), prostate-specific antigen-free survival (55% vs 38% at 5 yr; p < 0.001), and overall survival (89% vs 84% at 5 yr; p = 0.01). This was verified by Cox regression analysis for MFS (hazard ratio 1.84, 95% confidence interval 1.13-2.99; p = 0.01). We found that adherence to the EAU criteria is associated with a lower risk of BCR and, more importantly, of metastasis after surgery. PATIENT SUMMARY: We looked at outcomes of surgical removal of the prostate for prostate cancer recurrence after radiotherapy or other nonsurgical treatments according to whether or not patients met the European Association of Urology (EAU) criteria for this surgery. We found that men who did not meet the criteria had a higher risk of metastasis and their benefit from surgery might be significantly less than for patients who do meet the EUA criteria.