Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 44
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Urol ; 207(1): 95-107, 2022 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34433302

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Multiple studies demonstrate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy detects more clinically significant cancer than systematic biopsy; however, some clinically significant cancers are detected by systematic biopsy only. While these events are rare, we sought to perform a retrospective analysis of these cases to ascertain the reasons that MRI-targeted biopsy missed clinically significant cancer which was subsequently detected on systematic prostate biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were enrolled in a prospective study comparing cancer detection rates by transrectal MRI-targeted fusion biopsy and systematic 12-core biopsy. Patients with an elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA), abnormal digital rectal examination, or imaging findings concerning for prostate cancer underwent prostate MRI and subsequent MRI-targeted and systematic biopsy in the same setting. The subset of patients with grade group (GG) ≥3 cancer found on systematic biopsy and GG ≤2 cancer (or no cancer) on MRI-targeted biopsy was classified as MRI-targeted biopsy misses. A retrospective analysis of the MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy real-time screen captures determined the cause of MRI-targeted biopsy miss. Multivariable logistic regression analysis compared baseline characteristics of patients with MRI-targeted biopsy misses to GG-matched patients whose clinically significant cancer was detected by MRI-targeted biopsy. RESULTS: Over the study period of 2007 to 2019, 2,103 patients met study inclusion criteria and underwent combined MRI-targeted and systematic prostate biopsies. A total of 41 (1.9%) men were classified as MRI-targeted biopsy misses. Most MRI-targeted biopsy misses were due to errors in lesion targeting (21, 51.2%), followed by MRI-invisible lesions (17, 40.5%) and MRI lesions missed by the radiologist (3, 7.1%). On logistic regression analysis, lower Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADSTM) score was associated with having clinically significant cancer missed on MRI-targeted biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: While uncommon, most MRI-targeted biopsy misses are due to errors in lesion targeting, which highlights the importance of accurate co-registration and targeting when using software-based fusion platforms. Additionally, some patients will harbor MRI-invisible lesions which are untargetable by MRI-targeted platforms. The presence of a low PI-RADS score despite a high PSA is suggestive of harboring an MRI-invisible lesion.


Asunto(s)
Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Diagnóstico Erróneo , Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Anciano , Humanos , Biopsia Guiada por Imagen/métodos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos
2.
J Urol ; 207(4): 823-831, 2022 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34854746

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The underlying premise of prostate cancer active surveillance (AS) is that cancers likely to metastasize will be recognized and eliminated before cancer-related disease can ensue. Our study was designed to determine the prostate cancer upgrading rate when biopsy guided by magnetic resonance imaging (MRGBx) is used before entry and during AS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cohort included 519 men with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer who enrolled in prospective studies (NCT00949819 and NCT00102544) between February 2008 and February 2020. Subjects were preliminarily diagnosed with Gleason Grade Group (GG) 1 cancer; AS began when subsequent MRGBx confirmed GG1 or GG2. Participants underwent confirmatory MRGBx (targeted and systematic) followed by surveillance MRGBx approximately every 12 to 24 months. The primary outcome was tumor upgrading to ≥GG3. RESULTS: Upgrading to ≥GG3 was found in 92 men after a median followup of 4.8 years (IQR 3.1-6.5) after confirmatory MRGBx. Upgrade-free probability after 5 years was 0.85 (95% CI 0.81-0.88). Cancer detected in a magnetic resonance imaging lesion at confirmatory MRGBx increased risk of subsequent upgrading during AS (HR 2.8; 95% CI 1.3-6.0), as did presence of GG2 (HR 2.9; 95% CI 1.1-8.2) In men who upgraded ≥GG3 during AS, upgrading was detected by targeted cores only in 27%, systematic cores only in 25% and both in 47%. In 63 men undergoing prostatectomy, upgrading from MRGBx was found in only 5 (8%). CONCLUSIONS: When AS begins and follows with MRGBx (targeted and systematic), upgrading rate (≥GG3) is greater when tumor is initially present within a magnetic resonance imaging lesion or when pathology is GG2 than when these features are absent.


Asunto(s)
Biopsia Guiada por Imagen/métodos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Espera Vigilante/métodos , Anciano , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Clasificación del Tumor , Estudios Prospectivos , Prostatectomía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Factores de Riesgo
3.
J Urol ; 206(3): 539-547, 2021 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33904762

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Historically, open techniques have been favored over minimally invasive approaches for complex surgeries. We aimed to identify differences in perioperative outcomes, surgical footprints, and complication rates in patients undergoing either open or robotic reoperative partial nephrectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing reoperative partial nephrectomy was performed. Patients were assigned to cohorts based on current and prior surgical approaches: open after open, open after minimally invasive surgery, robotic after open, and robotic after minimally invasive surgery cohorts. Perioperative outcomes were compared among cohorts. Factors contributing to complications were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 192 patients underwent reoperative partial nephrectomy, including 103 in the open after open, 10 in the open after minimally invasive surgery, 47 in the robotic after open, and 32 in the robotic after minimally invasive surgery cohorts. The overall and major complication (grade ≥3) rates were 65% and 19%, respectively. The number of blood transfusions, overall complications, and major complications were significantly lower in robotic compared to open surgical cohorts. On multivariate analysis, the robotic approach was protective against major complications (OR 0.3, p=0.02) and estimated blood loss was predictive (OR 1.03, p=0.004). Prior surgical approach was not predictive for major complications. CONCLUSIONS: Reoperative partial nephrectomy is feasible using both open and robotic approaches. While the robotic approach was independently associated with fewer major complications, prior approach was not, implying that prior surgical approaches are less important to perioperative outcomes and in contributing to the overall surgical footprint.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Renales/cirugía , Nefrectomía/efectos adversos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Reoperación/efectos adversos , Adulto , Anciano , Transfusión Sanguínea/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios de Factibilidad , Femenino , Humanos , Laparoscopía/efectos adversos , Laparoscopía/métodos , Laparoscopía/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Nefrectomía/métodos , Nefrectomía/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/terapia , Reoperación/métodos , Reoperación/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/métodos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/estadística & datos numéricos , Resultado del Tratamiento
4.
J Urol ; 205(5): 1352-1360, 2021 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33356479

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Active surveillance for patients with low and intermediate risk prostate cancers is becoming a more utilized option in recent years. However, the use of magnetic resonance imaging and imaging-targeted biopsy for monitoring grade progression has been poorly studied in this population. We aim to define the utility of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy in an active surveillance population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between July 2007 and January 2020, patients with diagnosed prostate cancer who elected active surveillance were monitored with prostate magnetic resonance imaging, imaging-targeted biopsy and standard systematic biopsy. Patients were eligible for surveillance if diagnosed with any volume Gleason grade 1 disease and select Gleason grade 2 disease. Grade progression (Gleason grade 1 to ≥2 disease and Gleason grade 2 to ≥3 disease) for each biopsy modality was measured at 2 years, 4 years and 6+ years. RESULTS: In total, 369 patients had both magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic biopsy and were surveilled for at least 1 year. At 2 years, systematic biopsy, magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy and combined biopsy (systematic+imaging-targeted) detected grade progression in 44 patients (15.9%), 73 patients (26.4%) and 90 patients (32.5%), respectively. Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy detected more cancer grade progression compared to systematic biopsy in both the low and intermediate risk populations (p <0.001). Of all 90 grade progressions at the 2-year time point 46 (51.1%) were found by magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy alone and missed by systematic biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy detected significantly more grade progressions in our active surveillance cohort compared to systematic biopsy at 2 years. Our results provide compelling evidence that prostate magnetic resonance imaging and imaging-targeted biopsy should be included in contemporary active surveillance protocols.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Espera Vigilante , Anciano , Biopsia , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Humanos , Biopsia Guiada por Imagen , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Clasificación del Tumor , Estudios Prospectivos
5.
J Urol ; 206(5): 1157-1165, 2021 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34181465

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: We sought to evaluate whether bilateral prostate cancer detected at active surveillance (AS) enrollment is associated with progression to Grade Group (GG) ≥2 and to compare the efficacy of combined targeted biopsy plus systematic biopsy (Cbx) vs systematic biopsy (Sbx) or targeted biopsy alone to detect bilateral disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospectively maintained database of patients referred to our institution from 2007-2020 was queried. The study cohort included all AS patients with GG1 on confirmatory Cbx and followup of at least 1 year. Cox proportional hazard analysis identified baseline characteristics associated with progression to ≥GG2 at any point throughout followup. RESULTS: Of 579 patients referred, 103 patients had GG1 on Cbx and were included in the study; 49/103 (47.6%) patients progressed to ≥GG2, with 30/72 (41.7%) patients with unilateral disease progressing and 19/31 (61.3%) patients with bilateral disease progressing. Median time to progression was 68 months vs 52 months for unilateral and bilateral disease, respectively (p=0.006). Both prostate specific antigen density (HR 1.72, p=0.005) and presence of bilateral disease (HR 2.21, p=0.012) on confirmatory biopsy were associated with AS progression. At time of progression, GG and risk group were significantly higher in patients with bilateral versus unilateral disease. Cbx detected 16% more patients with bilateral disease than Sbx alone. CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral disease and prostate specific antigen density at confirmatory Cbx conferred greater risk of earlier AS progression. Cbx was superior to Sbx for identifying bilateral disease. AS risk-stratification protocols may benefit from including presence of bilateral disease and should use Cbx to detect bilateral disease.


Asunto(s)
Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Espera Vigilante/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Biopsia con Aguja Gruesa/métodos , Biopsia con Aguja Gruesa/estadística & datos numéricos , Imagen de Difusión por Resonancia Magnética/estadística & datos numéricos , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Humanos , Biopsia Guiada por Imagen/métodos , Biopsia Guiada por Imagen/estadística & datos numéricos , Calicreínas/sangre , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética Intervencional/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Imagen Multimodal/métodos , Imagen Multimodal/estadística & datos numéricos , Clasificación del Tumor , Estudios Prospectivos , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Medición de Riesgo/estadística & datos numéricos , Factores de Riesgo , Ultrasonografía Intervencional/estadística & datos numéricos
6.
World J Urol ; 39(3): 729-739, 2021 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33388878

RESUMEN

Focal therapy is growing as an alternative management options for men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Parallel to the increasing popularity of active surveillance (AS) as a treatment for low-risk disease, there has been an increased interest towards providing focal therapy for patients with intermediate-risk disease. Focal therapy can act as a logical "middle ground" in patients who seek treatment while minimizing potential side effects of definitive whole-gland treatment. The aim of the current review is to define the rationale of focal therapy in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer and highlight the importance of patient selection in focal therapy candidacy.


Asunto(s)
Técnicas de Ablación , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Técnicas de Ablación/métodos , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Humanos , Masculino , Tratamientos Conservadores del Órgano , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Medición de Riesgo
7.
Clin Adv Hematol Oncol ; 19(7): 460-467, 2021 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34236345

RESUMEN

Oligometastatic prostate cancer is a subtype of metastatic disease that generally is defined by the presence of 5 or fewer metastatic lesions. Metastatic prostate cancer currently is treated with androgen deprivation therapy and additional systemic therapy, such as novel antiandrogen medications or chemotherapy. The management of metastatic prostate cancer is evolving, however, with the notion that some patients with low-burden metastatic disease may benefit from both local and systemic therapy. Local therapy of the prostate in the setting of oligometastatic prostate cancer is a new concept. Evidence from retrospective studies suggests that cytoreductive therapy, including radical prostatectomy, can improve overall survival in these patients. Ongoing randomized trials are comparing cytoreductive therapy with standard-of-care treatment options. Local therapy in the form of radiation has also been investigated in phase 2 randomized trials. In this review, we discuss the biological and clinical rationales for local therapy, review the current evidence for local therapy, and compare the clinical designs of various ongoing trials.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Antagonistas de Andrógenos/uso terapéutico , Animales , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Humanos , Masculino , Metástasis de la Neoplasia/patología , Metástasis de la Neoplasia/radioterapia , Metástasis de la Neoplasia/terapia , Próstata/efectos de los fármacos , Próstata/patología , Próstata/efectos de la radiación , Próstata/cirugía , Prostatectomía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/radioterapia
8.
Clin Adv Hematol Oncol ; 19(2): 108-118, 2021 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33596192

RESUMEN

Recent population-based studies suggest that the incidence of advanced and metastatic prostate cancer may be increasing. Concurrently with this apparent stage migration toward advanced disease, several major developments have occurred in the treatment paradigm for men with advanced prostate cancer. These include the US Food and Drug Administration approval of 8 novel agents over the last decade. In addition to novel pharmaceuticals, rapidly evolving diagnostic tools have emerged. This review provides a primer for clinicians who treat men with advanced prostate cancer, including medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and urologists.


Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma/terapia , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Terapias en Investigación , Adenocarcinoma/diagnóstico por imagen , Adenocarcinoma/secundario , Androstenos/uso terapéutico , Benzamidas/uso terapéutico , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Terapia Combinada , Diagnóstico por Imagen/métodos , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Docetaxel/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Nitrilos/uso terapéutico , Feniltiohidantoína/uso terapéutico , Medicina de Precisión , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/terapia , Radioterapia Adyuvante , Radio (Elemento)/uso terapéutico , Taxoides/uso terapéutico
9.
J Urol ; 204(6): 1229-1235, 2020 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32716685

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: We identified baseline imaging and clinical characteristics of patients that may improve risk stratification among patients being evaluated for active surveillance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From July 2007 to January 2020 patients referred to our institution for prostate cancer were evaluated and those who remained on active surveillance were identified. Men underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging upon entry into our active surveillance protocol during which baseline demographic and imaging data were documented. Patients were then followed and outcomes, specifically progression to Gleason Grade Group (GG)3 or greater disease, were recorded. RESULTS: Of the men placed on active surveillance 344 had at least 1 PI-RADS score documented. For those with an index lesion PI-RADS category of 5, 33% (17/51) had progression to GG3 or greater on active surveillance with a median time to progression of 31 months. When comparing the progression-free survival times and progression rates in each category, PI-RADS category was found to be associated with progression to GG3 or greater on active surveillance (p <0.01). On univariable analysis factors associated with progression included an index lesion PI-RADS category of 5, prostate specific antigen density and the size of the largest lesion. On multivariable analysis only PI-RADS category of 5 and prostate specific antigen density were associated with progression on active surveillance. CONCLUSIONS: PI-RADS lesion categories at baseline multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging during active surveillance enrollment can be used to predict cancer progression to GG3 or greater on active surveillance. This information, along with other clinical data, can better assist urologists in identifying and managing patients appropriate for active surveillance.


Asunto(s)
Imagen por Resonancia Magnética Intervencional/estadística & datos numéricos , Imágenes de Resonancia Magnética Multiparamétrica/estadística & datos numéricos , Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Espera Vigilante/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Biopsia con Aguja Gruesa/estadística & datos numéricos , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Humanos , Biopsia Guiada por Imagen/estadística & datos numéricos , Calicreínas/sangre , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Clasificación del Tumor/estadística & datos numéricos , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Estudios Prospectivos , Próstata/patología , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Medición de Riesgo/estadística & datos numéricos , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo
10.
Clin Adv Hematol Oncol ; 18(2): 116-125, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32558805

RESUMEN

Prostate cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in men after skin cancer. Owing to the rising popularity of prostate-specific antigen screening, large numbers of patients are receiving a diagnosis of prostate cancer and undergoing whole-gland treatment. Some patients with a diagnosis of low-risk, localized disease may not benefit from whole-gland treatment, however, given its known morbidity. In response to advances in prostate imaging and evidence suggesting that the prognosis in prostate cancer is related to the index lesion, many patients have begun to opt for focal therapy, which targets a lesion rather than the entire prostate. This "middle ground" of therapy, between active surveillance and whole-gland treatment, is appealing to patients because the risk for side effects is believed to be lower with focal therapy than with whole-gland treatment. This review discusses the oncologic rationale for focal therapy in localized prostate cancer, examines the major therapy modalities, and addresses future directions.


Asunto(s)
Próstata/metabolismo , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/metabolismo , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Terapia Combinada , Humanos , Masculino , Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología
11.
Clin Adv Hematol Oncol ; 16(6): 438-446, 2018 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30067615

RESUMEN

Kidney cancer is the eighth most commonly diagnosed cancer in the United States, and nearly one-third of patients have locally advanced or metastatic disease at presentation. Historically, survival outcomes for patients with advanced disease have been poor. In recent years, several novel targeted agents have emerged for the management of advanced renal cell carcinoma that have changed treatment paradigms. At the same time, surgical therapy continues to have a critical role in the management of selected patients. Recent medical and surgical advances have improved the prognosis for patients with a diagnosis of advanced disease. This review provides an overview of the current treatment landscape for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.


Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Células Renales/diagnóstico , Carcinoma de Células Renales/terapia , Neoplasias Renales/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Renales/terapia , Carcinoma de Células Renales/etiología , Carcinoma de Células Renales/mortalidad , Terapia Combinada , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Humanos , Neoplasias Renales/etiología , Neoplasias Renales/mortalidad , Metástasis de la Neoplasia , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Resultado del Tratamiento
13.
Clin Adv Hematol Oncol ; 15(9): 708-715, 2017 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28949942

RESUMEN

Seminomas account for approximately 50% of all cases of testicular cancer. Testicular cancer is a highly curable disease that can be broadly classified as either seminomatous or nonseminomatous; the management and treatment of the 2 forms vary widely. Although surgery plays a large role in the management of nonseminoma, its role in the management of seminoma is much more limited. Most clinicians in the United States choose orchiectomy followed by surveillance for patients with stage I seminomatous disease, and chemotherapy or radiation-followed by surgery for the management of residual masses-for patients with disease that is stage II and higher. Recently, clinicians have proposed a larger role for surgery in stage II seminoma to avoid the long-term toxic effects of chemotherapy and radiation therapy. In this review, we discuss the oncologic rationale for the treatment of seminoma, the role of surgery, and the use of minimally invasive operative techniques for retroperitoneal lymph node dissection.


Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos/métodos , Orquiectomía/métodos , Seminoma/cirugía , Neoplasias Testiculares/cirugía , Humanos , Masculino , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Seminoma/patología , Neoplasias Testiculares/patología
15.
BJU Int ; 114(6b): E43-E49, 2014 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24712649

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To describe the detection rate of anteriorly located prostate cancer (PCa) with the addition of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/ultrasonography (US) fusion-guided biopsy (FGB) to the standard transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided biopsy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients, regardless of their biopsy history, who were referred for clinical suspicion of PCa (i.e elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and abnormal digital rectal examination) underwent 3T multiparametric-MRI (mpMRI) screening; and those with suspicious lesions in the anterior region of the prostate were identified. Patients then received a FGB of all suspicious lesions in addition to a systematic 12-core extended sextant TRUS-guided biopsy. We conducted a lesion-based analysis comparing cancer detection rates of anterior targets using FGB vs systematic cores taken from the same anatomic sextant within the prostate. Lengths of cancer in the most involved core were also compared between the two biopsy techniques used. Patients with only anterior targets were analysed separately. RESULTS: Of 499 patients undergoing FGB, 162 had a total of 241 anterior lesions. The mean age, PSA level and prostate volume in this group were 62 years, 12.7 ng/dL, and 57 mL, respectively. In total, PCa was diagnosed in 121 anterior lesions (50.2%) identified on mpMRI. Sixty-two (25.7%) of these anterior lesions were documented as positive for cancer on systematic 12-core TRUS-guided biopsy cores, while 97 (40.2%) were positive on the targeted FGB cores (P = 0.001). In lesions that were positive on both FGB and TRUS biopsy, the most involved core was 112% longer on FGB (3.7 vs 1.6 mm, P ≤ 0.01). Forty-two patients had only anterior lesions on mpMRI; of these, 24 (57.1%) were found to have cancer on the FGB + TRUS biopsy platform. Six patients were positive on FGB only and 13 were positive on both biopsy techniques; however, 7/13 patients were upgraded to a higher Gleason score after FGB. All five patients positive on TRUS biopsy only were candidates for active surveillance. CONCLUSION: The results showed that FGB detects significantly more anteriorly located PCa than does TRUS-guided biopsy alone and it may serve as an effective tool for the subset of patients with such tumours.


Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma/patología , Biopsia por Aspiración con Aguja Fina Guiada por Ultrasonido Endoscópico/métodos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética Intervencional , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Adenocarcinoma/sangre , Adenocarcinoma/diagnóstico , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Clasificación del Tumor , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Carga Tumoral
16.
Urol Case Rep ; 55: 102778, 2024 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39036288

RESUMEN

Caval thrombus with intracardiac involvement is a rare condition that is associated with renal cell carcinoma. Few reports in literature describe this presentation with metastatic melanoma. Metastatic melanoma is known to involve the adrenal gland, although associated tumor thrombus extension into the renal vein and inferior vena cava is extremely rare. In this case report, we describe radical nephrectomy and adrenalectomy for metastatic melanoma.

17.
Urol Ann ; 16(3): 221-226, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39290227

RESUMEN

Introduction: In estimated glomerular filtration rate equations (eGFR), the race multiplier (RM) yields greater eGFR values and may assign less severe chronic kidney disease (CKD) stages to black individuals. When deciding on appropriateness for partial nephrectomy (PN), patients with CKD are often considered a relative or absolute indication. We hypothesize that the eGFR RM may have ramifications for patients being counseled for radical nephrectomy (RN) versus PN to manage their renal tumor. Methods: We utilized prospective and retrospective, IRB-approved single-center databases to select patients who underwent PN or RN between 2016 and 2022. Demographics, preoperative risk factors, preoperative eGFR, and surgical management were collected. Descriptive statistics and two-tailed difference of proportion tests compared the percentage of patients with CKD who underwent nephrectomy. Results: This cohort included 1137 patients who underwent RN or PN, including 74 (6.5%) Black patients and 93.5% (n = 1063) non-Black patients. There was no statistically significant difference between the eGFR of Black and non-Black individuals using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation (P = 0.24) or Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration 2009 (CKD-EPI 2009) (P = 0.45); however, there was statistically significant difference in eGFR between sample populations when using CKD-EPI 2021 (P = 0.0055). Of the Black patient cohort, 16.2% of patients reclassified to a worse CKD class using CKD-EPI 2021, including 9.5% of Black patients reclassified to CKD3a or worse, and 14.6% of all patients (Black and non-Black) reclassified to a different CKD class under the CKD-EPI 2021 equation. Conclusions: There are quantitative differences in the evaluation of eGFR when utilizing different equations that may impact clinical considerations and health equity outcomes for nephrectomy across racial groups.

18.
BJU Int ; 112(4): 508-16, 2013 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23746198

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To characterise the feasibility and safety of a novel transurethral ultrasound (US)-therapy device combined with real-time multi-plane magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based temperature monitoring and temperature feedback control, to enable spatiotemporally precise regional ablation of simulated prostate gland lesions in a preclinical canine model. To correlate ablation volumes measured with intra-procedural cumulative thermal damage estimates, post-procedural MRI, and histopathology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three dogs were treated with three targeted ablations each, using a prototype MRI-guided transurethral US-therapy system (Philips Healthcare, Vantaa, Finland). MRI provided images for treatment planning, guidance, real-time multi-planar thermometry, as well as post-treatment evaluation of efficacy. After treatment, specimens underwent histopathological analysis to determine the extent of necrosis and cell viability. Statistical analyses (Pearson's correlation, Student's t-test) were used to evaluate the correlation between ablation volumes measured with intra-procedural cumulative thermal damage estimates, post-procedural MRI, and histopathology. RESULTS: MRI combined with a transurethral US-therapy device enabled multi-planar temperature monitoring at the target as well as in surrounding tissues, allowing for safe, targeted, and controlled ablations of prescribed lesions. Ablated volumes measured by cumulative thermal dose positively correlated with volumes determined by histopathological analysis (r(2) 0.83, P < 0.001). Post-procedural contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MRI showed a positive correlation with non-viable areas on histopathological analysis (r(2) 0.89, P < 0.001, and r(2) 0.91, P = 0.003, respectively). Additionally, there was a positive correlation between ablated volumes according to cumulative thermal dose and volumes identified on post-procedural contrast-enhanced MRI (r(2) 0.77, P < 0.01). There was no difference in mean ablation volumes assessed with the various analysis methods (P > 0.05, Student's t-test). CONCLUSIONS: MRI-guided transurethral US therapy enabled safe and targeted ablations of prescribed lesions in a preclinical canine prostate model. Ablation volumes were reliably predicted by intra- and post-procedural imaging. Clinical studies are needed to confirm the feasibility, safety, oncological control, and functional outcomes of this therapy in patients in whom focal therapy is indicated.


Asunto(s)
Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Terapia por Ultrasonido/métodos , Animales , Perros , Masculino , Modelos Anatómicos , Uretra
19.
Urol Oncol ; 41(5): 257.e1-257.e6, 2023 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37037679

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The RENAL nephrometry score (RNS) is widely used to describe renal mass complexity and inform patient counseling for partial nephrectomy (PN). However, in cases with multiple tumors, it is unknown which features drive perioperative outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To employ a novel scoring equation (multiplex score [MS]) derived from RNS to assess outcomes of multiplex PN at our institution. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 62 consecutive multiplex PN (median (range) # tumors = 4(2-11), 65% robotic) were performed by a single surgeon. The MS was defined a priori as a weighted score derived from RNS (# low risk ([LR] lesions) + 2*(# intermediate risk [IR]) + 4*(# high risk [HR]) based on published complication rates. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: MS was dichotomized into favorable/unfavorable based on median score. Patient outcomes were maintained prospectively. MS was compared with other potential RNS derived scoring systems. RESULTS AND LIMITATION: A total of 249 tumors were scored. Median (range) MS was 6(range 2-20, IQR 3-8). Complications occurred in 10 patients (16.1%). Only 1 complication occurred in the favorable MS(<6) group, and MS was associated with perioperative complication (P = 0.02) and blood loss (P < .001). When compared to other potential scoring systems, MS had the best area under the curve (AUC) to predict operative complications (0.75). CONCLUSIONS: The novel MS was associated with complications and blood loss. This tool may facilitate standardized reporting of complexity for multiplex series, with special relevance for hereditary cancer syndromes. PATIENT SUMMARY: For patients who have one kidney tumor, there are established scoring systems to help patients and surgeons decide on the surgical plan. However currently, for patients with more than one renal tumor, there is no such scoring system. Here, we present the "Multiplex Score" to aid shared-decision-making in cases with more than one renal tumor.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Renales , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Robótica , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Nefrectomía/métodos , Riñón/patología , Neoplasias Renales/patología , Resultado del Tratamiento , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/métodos
20.
J Urol ; 188(6): 2152-2157, 2012 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23083875

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Patients with negative transrectal ultrasound biopsies and a persistent clinical suspicion are at risk for occult but significant prostate cancer. The ability of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy to detect these occult prostate lesions may make it an effective tool in this challenging scenario. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between March 2007 and November 2011 all men underwent prostate 3 T endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging. All concerning lesions were targeted with magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy. In addition, all patients underwent standard 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy. Men with 1 or more negative systematic prostate biopsies were included in our cohort. RESULTS: Of the 195 men with previous negative biopsies, 73 (37%) were found to have cancer using the magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy combined with 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy. High grade cancer (Gleason score 8+) was discovered in 21 men (11%), all of whom had disease detected with magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy. However, standard transrectal ultrasound biopsy missed 12 of these high grade cancers (55%). Pathological upgrading occurred in 28 men (38.9%) as a result of magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion targeting vs standard transrectal ultrasound biopsy. The diagnostic yield of combined magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion platform was unrelated to the number of previous negative biopsies and persisted despite increasing the number of previous biopsy sessions. On multivariate analysis only prostate specific antigen density and magnetic resonance imaging suspicion level remained significant predictors of cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging with a magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy platform is a novel diagnostic tool for detecting prostate cancer and may be ideally suited for patients with negative transrectal ultrasound biopsies in the face of a persistent clinical suspicion for cancer.


Asunto(s)
Biopsia Guiada por Imagen/métodos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética Intervencional/métodos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Análisis Multivariante , Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Ultrasonografía
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA