Positive margins after nephron-sparing surgery for renal cell carcinoma: long-term follow-up of patients on active surveillance.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse our long-term oncological outcomes with active surveillance in patients with positive surgical margins (PSMs) after nephron-sparing surgery (NSS) for renal cell carcinoma (RCC), as this situation is a difficult therapeutic dilemma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed open NSS for renal masses with frozen-section analysis of any suspicious zone of the surgical bed, followed by extensive argon-beam coagulation. In patients where the final histopathological examination of the renal mass revealed PSMs, follow-up consisted of computed tomography (CT) every 6 months in the first 2 years and then annually up to 5 years, and thereafter we alternated ultrasonography with CT. RESULTS: From 1995 to 2003 we had 11 cases of microscopic definitive PSMs after NSS for RCC. Two patients required nephrectomy (one for postoperative bleeding and another as an elective procedure), so nine were followed. These patients were either operated under elective (seven) or imperative (two) conditions. The histological subtype was clear cell carcinoma in three, papillary in two, chromophobe in two and hybrid oncocytic RCC in two, with a Furhman grade of 2 in six and 3 in three. The mean size was 31.4 mm, and the stage was pT1a in six, pT1b in one and pT3a in two. After a median follow-up of 80.5 months, there was no local recurrence or distant progression. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, microscopic PSMs in NSS specimens can be managed conservatively with active surveillance, achieving excellent results and avoiding extensive reoperation without compromising long-term oncological outcomes.

Prospective, randomized, open-label, fixed-dose, crossover study to establish preference of patients with erectile dysfunction after taking the three PDE-5 inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: We conducted a prospective, randomized, open-label, fixed-dose preference study, with a crossover design, using sildenafil, vardenafil, and tadalafil. AIM: To assess patient preference for sildenafil (100 mg), vardenafil (20 mg), and tadalafil (20 mg) for the treatment of erectile dysfunction. Secondary objectives included finding out whether patients would follow treatment with a second or third option, in the event that the preferred drug was not available, and to assess side effects. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient preference for any treatment, and evaluation of the elements that patients would assess when choosing one of these drugs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sildenafil (100 mg), vardenafil (20 mg), and tadalafil (20 mg) were taken at least six times over a period of 45-60 days with a washout period of 7 days. A total of 132 patients were enrolled to achieve a valid sample of 90 cases (15 per randomized group, total of six groups). Enrolled patients had mild to moderate erectile function. RESULTS: The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) score improved from baseline and was statistically significant in all cases (P < 0.0001). When we compared the IIEF scores, we found a statistically significant difference between tadalafil and vardenafil (P = 0.0002) favoring the former; similar results were obtained with the Erectile Dysfunction Inventory for Treatment Satisfaction (EDITS) Questionnaire (P = 0.000075). We also found a significant difference (P = 0.012) between tadalafil and sildenafil, again in favor of the former. In assessing drug preference, 25 patients (27.77%) chose sildenafil, 18 (20%) vardenafil, and 47 (52.22%) tadalafil. A total of 94% of patients would be willing to take another drug if the preferred choice was not available. All drugs were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Although this is a preference study based on subjective elements, statistically significant differences comparing the IIEF score and the EDITS Questionnaire lead us to believe that beyond patients' subjective preference per se, said preference is probably also based on a genuinely superior response to one drug over another.

[Diagnostic methodology for the biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after brachytherapy]. / Metodología diagnóstica ante la recidiva bioquímica después de braquiterapia.

Currently prostate cancer is the most frequent extracutaneous neoplasia in males in the USA, and second after lung cancer in our country. Over the last years the profile of prostate cancers diagnosed has changed due to the wide diffusion of PSA determination. Currently, almost 47% of prostate cancers are low risk at diagnosis. In this situation, the minimally invasive therapies such as brachytherapy have a growing acceptance in our environment. We analyze the special PSA kinetics after brachytherapy, and the difficulty entailed by the diagnosis of biochemical recurrence after brachytherapy, performing a bibliographic review of the available scientific evidence.