Risk stratification for early biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer in the era of multiparametric magnetic resonance imagining-targeted biopsy.

BACKGROUND: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MRI-targeted biopsy are nowadays recommended in the prostate cancer (PCa) diagnostic pathway. Ploussard and Mazzone have integrated these tools into novel risk classification systems predicting the risk of early biochemical recurrence (eBCR) in PCa patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP). We aimed to assess available risk classification systems and to define the best-performing. METHODS: Data on 1371 patients diagnosed by MRI-targeted biopsy and treated by RP between 2014 and 2022 at eight European tertiary referral centers were analyzed. Risk classifications systems included were the European Association of Urology (EAU) and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk groups, the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) score, the International Staging Collaboration for Cancer of the Prostate (STAR-CAP) classification, the Ploussard and Mazzone models, and ISUP grade group. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to compare eBCR among risk classification systems. Performance was assessed in terms of discrimination quantified using Harrell's c-index, calibration, and decision curve analysis (DCA). RESULTS: Overall, 152 (11%) patients had eBCR at a median follow-up of 31 months (interquartile range: 19-45). The 3-year eBCR-free survival rate was 91% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 89-93). For each risk classification system, a significant difference among survival probabilities was observed (log-rank test p < 0.05) except for NCCN classification (p = 0.06). The highest discrimination was obtained with the STAR-CAP classification (c-index 66%) compared to CAPRA score (63% vs. 66%, p = 0.2), ISUP grade group (62% vs. 66, p = 0.07), Ploussard (61% vs. 66%, p = 0.003) and Mazzone models (59% vs. 66%, p = 0.02), and EAU (57% vs. 66%, p < 0.001) and NCCN (57% vs. 66%, p < 0.001) risk groups. Risk classification systems demonstrated good calibration characteristics. At DCA, the CAPRA score showed the highest net benefit at a probability threshold of 9%-15%. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of risk classification systems using MRI and MRI-targeted information was less optimistic when tested in a contemporary set of patients. CAPRA score and STAR-CAP classification were the best-performing and should be preferred for treatment decision-making.

Sexual and ejaculatory function after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate and bipolar transurethral enucleation of the prostate: a single-center experience.

Currently available surgical treatments for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS) due to Benign Prostatic Obstruction (BPO) are associated with an increased risk of sexual dysfunction. The aim of our study is to compare sexual and ejaculatory function after Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP) and Bipolar Transurethral Enucleation of the Prostate (B-TUEP). We performed a retrospective analysis of data prospectively collected from 62 (44.9%) and 76 (55.1%) patients who underwent HoLEP and B-TUEP, respectively. Erectile function and ejaculation characteristics were assessed with the International Index of Erectile Function-Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) domain and the Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculatory function (MSHQ-EJ) questionnaires. Our study recorded no change in erectile function and no significant difference in rates of preserved antegrade ejaculation after both surgeries. One month after surgery, rates of physical pain/discomfort and perceived decreased physical pleasure during ejaculation were higher in HoLEP than B-TUEP patients (all p < 0.03). Moreover, HoLEP patients were more bothered by their ejaculatory difficulties than B-TUEP men (p = 0.03). At 3- and 12-months follow-up, all ejaculation-related differences disappeared. In conclusion, both procedures are valid alternatives for BPO treatment as they offer comparable urinary and sexual outcomes in the long term. However, in the first month after surgery, HoLEP patients present with more ejaculatory difficulties.

Bipolar Transurethral Enucleation of the Prostate: Is it a size-independent endoscopic treatment option for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia?

BACKGROUND: Bipolar Transurethral Enucleation of the Prostate (B-TUEP) is recommended as a first-choice treatment for benign prostatic obstruction in prostates >80 ml. Differently, B-TUEP is only considered as an alternative option after TURP for smaller prostates (30-80 ml). The aim of our study is to assess the relation between prostate size and surgical outcomes after B-TUEP. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of data collected from 172 patients submitted to B-TUEP. Patients were segregated according to tertiles of prostate volume (PV) (≤60 ml, 61-110 ml, >110 ml). For each group we evaluated enucleation efficacy (enucleated weight/enucleation time), complication rates, urinary and sexual function parameters. Functional and sexual parameters were compared between groups at baseline, 1 and 3 months follow up. Descriptive statistics and linear and logistic regression models tested the association between PV and postoperative complications/outcomes. RESULTS: Operative time and weight of enucleated adenomas increased along with prostate volumes (all p≤0.01). Enucleation efficacy was higher in men with PV >110 ml compared to other groups (p≤0.001). Length of hospital stay, catheterization time and rates of postoperative complications, such as transfusion and clot evacuation rates and bladder neck/urethral strictures, were comparable between groups. Urinary symptoms improved at 1-and 3-months in each group as compared to baseline evaluation (all p<0.01) but they did not differ according to PV. In each group maximum urinary flow and post-void residual volume significantly improved at 3 months compared to baseline (all p≤0.01), without differences according to PV. Sexual symptoms were similar between groups at each follow up assessment. At multivariable linear and logistic regression analysis, prostate volume was not associated with postoperative functional outcomes and complications. Conversely, patient's comorbid status and antiplatelet/anticoagulation use were independently associated with postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: According to our findings, B-TUEP should be considered a "size independent procedure" as it can provide symptom relief in men with prostates of all sizes with the same efficacy and safety profile.