RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Isolated recurrence in remnants of the seminal vesicles (SV) after treatment of primary prostate cancer (PCa) has become a more frequent entity with the widespread use of more sensitive next-generation imaging modalities. Salvage vesiculectomy is hypothesized to be a worthwhile management option in these patients. The primary goal of this study is to describe the surgical technique of this new treatment option. Secondary outcomes are peri- and post-operative complications and early oncological outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective multicenter study, including 108 patients with solitary recurrence in the SV treated between January 2009 and June 2022, was performed. Patients with local recurrences outside the SVs or with metastatic disease were excluded. Both SVs were resected using a robot-assisted or an open approach. In selected cases, a concomitant lymphadenectomy was performed. RESULTS: Overall, 31 patients (29%) reported complications, all but one grade 1 to 3 on the Clavien-Dindo Scale. A median PSA decrease of 2.07 ng/ml (IQR: 0.80-4.33, p < 0.001), translating into a median PSA reduction of 92% (IQR: 59-98%) was observed. At a median follow-up of 14 months, freedom from secondary treatment was 54%. Lymphadenectomy had a significant influence on PSA reduction (p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Salvage vesiculectomy for PCa recurrence limited to the SV is a safe procedure with excellent PSA response and is a potential curative treatment in a subset of patients. A concomitant lymphadenectomy can best be performed in all patients that did not underwent one at primary treatment.
Asunto(s)
Antígeno Prostático Específico , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Próstata , Pelvis , Vesículas SeminalesRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Salvage radical prostatectomy is rare due to the risk of postoperative complications. We compare salvage Retzius-sparing robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (SRS-RARP) with salvage standard robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (SS-RARP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 72 patients across 9 centers were identified (40 SRS-RARP vs 32 SS-RARP). Demographics, perioperative data, and pathological and functional outcomes were compared using Student's t-test and ANOVA. Cox proportional hazard models and Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed to assess risk of incontinence and time to continence. Linear regression models were constructed to investigate postoperative pad use and console time. RESULTS: Median followup was 23 vs 36 months for SRS-RARP vs SS-RARP. Console time and estimated blood loss favored SRS-RARP. There were no differences in complication rates or oncologic outcomes. SRS-RARP had improved continence (78.4% vs 43.8%, p <0.001 for 0-1 pad, 54.1% vs 6.3%, p <0.001 for 0 pad), lower pads per day (0.57 vs 2.03, p <0.001), and earlier return to continence (median 47 vs 180 days, p=0.008). SRS-RARP was associated with decreased incontinence defined as >0-1 pad (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.10-0.79, p=0.016), although not when defined as >0 pad (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.31-1.01, p=0.053). On adjusted analysis SRS-RARP was associated with decreased pads per day. Lymph node dissection and primary treatment with stereotactic body radiation therapy were associated with longer console time. CONCLUSIONS: SRS-RARP is a feasible salvage option with significantly improved urinary function outcomes. This may warrant increased utilization of SRS-RARP to manage men who fail nonsurgical primary treatment for prostate cancer.
Asunto(s)
Tratamientos Conservadores del Órgano/efectos adversos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Prostatectomía/efectos adversos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/efectos adversos , Terapia Recuperativa/efectos adversos , Incontinencia Urinaria/epidemiología , Anciano , Estudios de Factibilidad , Humanos , Pañales para la Incontinencia/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Tratamientos Conservadores del Órgano/métodos , Tratamientos Conservadores del Órgano/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/terapia , Próstata/patología , Próstata/cirugía , Prostatectomía/métodos , Prostatectomía/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/estadística & datos numéricos , Terapia Recuperativa/métodos , Terapia Recuperativa/estadística & datos numéricos , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Incontinencia Urinaria/etiología , Incontinencia Urinaria/terapiaRESUMEN
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide an overview of the current state of literature on organ-sparing approaches in penile cancer. Surgical as well as nonsurgical approaches can be adapted in the right setting, in an effort to spare patients from the burden of total or subtotal penectomy wherever possible. In this review, we focus on surgical approaches. RECENT FINDINGS: Narrower surgical margins do not seem to affect overall survival rates, neither do local recurrences. This has allowed a paradigm shift towards more sparing approaches locally. Contrary to what was previously thought, margins of a few millimetres suffice for adequate local cancer control. This allows laser therapy, wide local excisions, partial glansectomy and other surgical techniques to be performed in an organ-sparing fashion. Ablative techniques such as brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy also provide adequate local cancer control. These sparing approaches have an important effect on psychological and functional outcomes; however, they are insufficiently adapted even in larger referral centres. SUMMARY: Organ-sparing techniques should be used in penile cancer surgery whenever possible. Patient selection for the most appropriate technique is key to provide good cosmetic and functional results while remaining oncologically safe.
Asunto(s)
Tratamientos Conservadores del Órgano , Neoplasias del Pene , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Urológicos Masculinos , Humanos , Masculino , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia , Neoplasias del Pene/cirugía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Urológicos Masculinos/métodosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Quality control indicators (QCIs) can be used to objectively evaluate guideline adherence and benchmark quality among urologists and centers. OBJECTIVE: To assess six QCIs for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) using a prospective registry of transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) procedures. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Clinical data for TURBT cases were prospectively collected using electronic case report forms (eCRFs) embedded in the electronic medical record in three centers during 2013-2017. Pathological data were collected retrospectively. Patients with T0 disease or prior T2 disease were excluded. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We assessed six QCIs: complete resection (CR) status, presence of detrusor muscle (DM), re-TURBT, single instillation of mitomycin C (MMC), start of bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) therapy, and therapy ≤6 wk after diagnosis. We assessed the quality of reporting on QCIs and compliance with QCIs, compared compliance between centers and over time, and investigated correlation between compliance and recurrence-free survival (RFS). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Data for 1350 TURBT procedures were collected, of which 1151 were included for 907 unique patients. The distribution of European Association of Urology risk categories after TURBT was 271 with low risk, 464 with intermediate risk, and 416 with high risk. The quality of reporting for two QCIs was suboptimal, at 35% for DM and 51% for BCG. QCI compliance was 97% for CR, 31% for DM, 65% for MMC, 33% for re-TURBT, 39% for BCG, and 88% for therapy ≤6 wk after diagnosis. Compliance with all QCIs differed significantly among centers. Compliance with MMC and re-TURBT increased significantly over time, which could be attributed to one center. Compliance with MMC was significantly correlated with RFS. The main study limitation is the retrospective collection of pathology data. CONCLUSIONS: A TURBT registry consisting of eCRFs to collect pathology and outcome data allowed assessment of QCIs for NMIBC. Our study illustrates the feasibility of this approach in a real-life setting. Differences in performance on QCIs among centers can motivate urologists to improve their day-to-day care for patients with NMIBC, and can thus improve clinical outcomes. PATIENT SUMMARY: Our study demonstrates that quality control indicators for treatment of bladder cancer not invading the bladder muscle can be evaluated using electronic medical records. We assessed results for 1151 procedures in 907 individual patients to remove bladder tumors between 2013 and 2017 at three centers in Belgium. Compliance with the quality control indicators differed between centers, increased over time, and was correlated with recurrence of disease.
Asunto(s)
Vacuna BCG , Neoplasias de la Vejiga Urinaria , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Bélgica/epidemiología , Vacuna BCG/uso terapéutico , Resección Transuretral de la Vejiga , Administración Intravesical , Neoplasias de la Vejiga Urinaria/patología , Mitomicina/uso terapéutico , Control de CalidadRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: High-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients have a high risk of biochemical recurrence and metastatic progression following radical prostatectomy (RP). OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of neoadjuvant degarelix plus apalutamide before RP compared with degarelix with a matching placebo. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: ARNEO was a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase II neoadjuvant trial before RP performed between March 2019 and April 2021. Eligible patients had high-risk PCa and were amenable to RP. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to degarelix (240-80-80 mg) + apalutamide (240 mg/d) versus degarelix + matching placebo for 3 mo followed by RP. Prior to and following neoadjuvant treatment, pelvic 18F-PSMA-1007 positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was the difference in proportions of patients with minimal residual disease (MRD; = residual cancer burden (RCB) ≤0.25 cm3 at final pathology). Secondary endpoints included differences in prostate-specific antigen responses, pathological staging, and change in TNM stage on prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/MRI following hormonal treatment. Biomarkers (immunohistochemical staining on prostate biopsy [PTEN, ERG, Ki67, P53, GR, and PSMA] and PSMA PET/MRI-derived characteristics) associated with pathological response (MRD and RCB) were explored. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Patients were randomized to neoadjuvant degarelix + apalutamide (n = 45) or degarelix + matching placebo (n = 44) for 12 wk and underwent RP. Patients in the degarelix + apalutamide arm achieved a significantly higher rate of MRD than those in the control arm (38% vs 9.1%; relative risk [95% confidence interval] = 4.2 [1.5-11], p = 0.002). Patients with PTEN loss in baseline prostate biopsy attained significantly less MRD (11% vs 43%, p = 0.002) and had a higher RCB at final pathology (1.6 vs 0.40 cm3, p < 0.0001) than patients without PTEN loss. Following neoadjuvant hormonal therapy, PSMA PET-estimated tumor volumes (1.2 vs 2.5 ml, p = 0.01) and maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax; 4.3 vs 5.7, p = 0.007) were lower in patients with MRD than in patients without MRD. PSMA PET-estimated volume and PSMA PET SUVmax following neoadjuvant treatment correlated significantly with RCB at final pathology (both p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk PCa patients, neoadjuvant degarelix plus apalutamide prior to RP results in a significantly improved pathological response (MRD and RCB) compared with degarelix alone. Our trial results provide a solid hypothesis-generating basis for neoadjuvant phase 3 trials, which are powered to detect differences in long-term oncological outcome following neoadjuvant androgen receptor signaling inhibitor therapy. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, we looked at the difference in pathological responses in high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with degarelix plus apalutamide or degarelix plus matching placebo prior to radical prostatectomy. We demonstrated that patients treated with degarelix plus apalutamide achieved a significantly better tumor response than patients treated with degarelix plus matching placebo. Long-term follow-up is required to determine whether improved pathological outcome translates into better oncological outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Próstata , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Terapia Neoadyuvante/métodos , Prostatectomía/métodos , Radioisótopos de GalioRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Lymph node invasion (LNI) represents a poor prognostic factor after primary radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer (PCa). However, the impact of LNI on oncologic outcomes in salvage radical prostatectomy (SRP) patients is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of lymph node dissection (LND) and pathological lymph node status (pNX vs. pN0 vs. pN1) on long-term oncologic outcomes of SRP patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent SRP for recurrent PCa between 2000 and 2021 were identified from 12 high-volume centers. Kaplan-Meier analyses and multivariable Cox regression models were used. Endpoints were biochemical recurrence (BCR), overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS). RESULTS: Of 853 SRP patients, 87% (n = 727) underwent LND, and 21% (n = 151) harbored LNI. The median follow-up was 27 months. The mean number of removed lymph nodes was 13 in the LND cohort. At 72 months after SRP, BCR-free survival was 54% vs. 47% vs. 7.2% for patients with pNX vs. pN0 vs. pN1 (p < 0.001), respectively. At 120 months after SRP, OS rates were 89% vs. 81% vs. 41% (p < 0.001), and CSS rates were 94% vs. 96% vs. 82% (p = 0.02) for patients with pNX vs. pN0 vs. pN1, respectively. In multivariable Cox regression analyses, pN1 status was independently associated with BCR (HR: 1.77, p < 0.001) and death (HR: 2.89, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In SRP patients, LNI represents an independent poor prognostic factor. However, the oncologic benefit of LND in SRP remains debatable. These findings underline the need for a cautious LND indication in SRP patients as well as strict postoperative monitoring of SRP patients with LNI.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Persistent prostatic specific antigen (PSA) represents a poor prognostic factor for recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP). However, the impact of persistent PSA on oncologic outcomes in patients undergoing salvage RP is unknown. To investigate the impact of persistent PSA after salvage RP on long-term oncologic outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients who underwent salvage RP for recurrent prostate cancer between 2000 and 2021 were identified from twelve high-volume centers. Only patients with available PSA after salvage RP were included. Kaplan-Meier analyses and multivariable Cox regression models were used to test the effect of persistent PSA on biochemical recurrence (BCR), metastasis and any death after salvage RP. Persistent PSA was defined as a PSA-value ≥ 0.1 ng/ml, at first PSA-measurement after salvage RP. RESULTS: Overall, 580 patients were identified. Of those, 42% (n = 242) harbored persistent PSA. Median follow-up after salvage RP was 38 months, median time to salvage RP was 64 months and median time to first PSA after salvage RP was 2.2 months. At 84 months after salvage RP, BCR-free, metastasis-free, and overall survival was 6.6 vs. 59%, 71 vs. 88% and 77 vs. 94% for patients with persistent vs. undetectable PSA after salvage RP (all p < 0.01). In multivariable Cox models persistent PSA was an independent predictor for BCR (HR: 5.47, p < 0.001) and death (HR: 3.07, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Persistent PSA is common after salvage RP and represents an independent predictor for worse oncologic outcomes. Patients undergoing salvage RP should be closely monitored after surgery to identify those with persistent PSA.
RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata , Urología , Masculino , Humanos , Próstata/patología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , ProstatectomíaRESUMEN
Complete transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) is the initial procedure of choice for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer, but its quality is far from optimal in clinical practice. We evaluated the existing body of evidence substantiating current quality control indicators (QCIs) for TURBT. A literature search was performed using PubMed and Embase, and selected articles were reviewed according to their level of evidence. Disease recurrence and progression were used as the primary end points. No hard evidence supports complete resection as a QCI, but rationally, it is the most important indicator for TURBT. A repeat resection is an important QCI in high-risk disease patients, but evidence suggests that it may not be necessary when detrusor muscle is present in the initial resection specimen. The presence of detrusor muscle in the resection specimen is a validated QCI for TURBT. Adjuvant intravesical instillation is a scientifically proven QCI. Bladder perforation is a controversial QCI in the existing literature. No evidence indicates the ideal time frame for the initial TURBT; thus, initial therapy in the first 6 weeks after diagnosis is not a good QCI. Three of the 6 proposed QCIs for TURBT are supported by evidence. Our literature analysis indicated the use of complete resection, repeat resection, the presence of detrusor muscle, and intravesical instillation are QCIs to minimize recurrence and progression, and increase beneficial outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias de la Vejiga Urinaria/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Vejiga Urinaria/cirugía , Administración Intravesical , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Cistectomía/métodos , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Quimioterapia , Humanos , Inmunoterapia , Pronóstico , Control de Calidad , Vejiga Urinaria/cirugíaRESUMEN
Introduction: Salvage lymph node dissection (sLND) has been proposed as a treatment option for prostate cancer patients with lymph node (LN) recurrence following radical prostatectomy to delay or avoid palliative androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Historically sLND has been performed using an open approach, with its associated morbidity. A limited number of studies have reported peri-operative outcomes following robot-assisted sLND. However, a direct comparison with the open approach has hitherto not yet been reported. This study investigates whether robot-assisted sLND is associated with better peri-operative outcomes compared to the open approach. Early oncological outcomes are also compared. Patients and methods: In this retrospective study, clinical data were collected from 60 patients undergoing open sLND between 2010-2016 and 30 patients undergoing robot-assisted sLND between 2016 and 2018 at our tertiary referral center. The primary objective of the study was to compare peri-operative outcomes (length of stay, estimated blood loss, operative time, intra-operative, and postoperative complications) and LN yield between both procedures. As secondary objective early oncological outcome [biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) and clinical recurrence-free survival (CRFS)] was compared. Variables of interest were compared using the chi-squared test (categorical variables), two sample t-test, and Mann-Whitney U-test (continuous variables). To compare BRFS and CRFS, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and log-rank tests were performed. Results: Robotic sLND was associated with reduced blood loss (median 100 vs. 275cc; p < 0.0001) and shorter length of stay (median 2 vs. 7 days; p < 0.0001) compared to open sLND. Moreover, postoperative complications within 30 days after surgery were more prevalent in the open sLND group compared to the robotic group (41.6% vs. 20%, p = 0.04). No significant differences in LN yield (for each sLND template), BRFS, and CRFS were detected between both groups. Conclusion: Robot-assisted sLND is associated with significantly reduced peri-operative morbidity compared to open sLND. No difference in LN yield, BRFS and CRFS was seen between both groups. Modern imaging techniques underestimate the tumor burden and therefore, the surgical sLND template should not be limited to the positive spots on pre-operative imaging.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: This study examined the efficacy and safety of bone graft material ABM/P-15 (iFACTOR) for use in posterior lumbar interbody fusion. ABM/P-15 has been used safely for more than a decade in dental applications. METHODS: Forty patients underwent PLIF surgery, with each patient as control. Assessments up to 24 months included radiographs, CT scan, VAS, and ODI. Primary success criteria were fusion and safety. RESULTS: Intra-cage bridging bone occurred earlier with ABM/P-15 than autograft (97.73% vs. 59.09% at 6 months). On average pain decreased 29 points and function improved 43 points. Radio dense material outside the disk space occurred more frequently with ABM/P-15 than autograft, without clinical consequence. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that ABM/P-15 has equal or greater efficacy at 6 and 12 months. Pain improvements exceeded success criteria at all time points. Functional improvement exceeded success criteria at all time points. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study explores the safety and efficacy of an osteobiologic peptide enhanced bone graft material as a viable alternative to autograft and its attendant risks.