RESUMO
PURPOSE: We report 5-year safety and efficacy outcomes of the Aquablation procedure for the treatment of men with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia and large-volume prostate glands. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 101 men with moderate to severe benign prostatic hyperplasia symptoms and prostate volumes between 80 and 150 mL underwent a robotic-assisted Aquablation procedure in a prospective multicenter international trial (NCT03123250). Herein we report the final 5-year results. RESULTS: The study successfully met its safety and efficacy performance goal, which was based upon transurethral resection of the prostate outcomes typically done in smaller prostates, at 3 months. Mean prostate volume was 107 mL (range 80-150) at baseline. Patient symptoms showed a significant improvement where the mean (SD) International Prostate Symptom Score of 22.6 (6.4) at baseline to 6.8 (4.6) at 5 years, resulting in a change score of 15.9 (7.7, P < .001). Uroflowmetry measurements also demonstrated improvement where the mean maximum urinary flow rate increased from 8.6 (SD 3.4) to 17.1 (9.8) mL/s at 5 years, resulting in a change score of 9.2 (11.1) mL/s at 5 years (P < .001). A regression analysis evaluating change in PSA as a function of baseline PSA across all time points out to 5 years resulted in a 50% reduction. A prespecified subgroup analysis using a baseline prostate volume cutoff of 100 mL showed no difference in efficacy outcomes through 5 years. Freedom from a secondary benign prostatic hyperplasia procedure at 5 years was 96.3% based on Kaplan-Meier. CONCLUSIONS: At 5-years of prospective follow-up, the Aquablation procedure was shown to be safe with durable efficacy and low rates of retreatment in men with large prostates (80-150 mL).
Assuntos
Técnicas de Ablação , Sintomas do Trato Urinário Inferior , Hiperplasia Prostática , Ressecção Transuretral da Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Hiperplasia Prostática/complicações , Hiperplasia Prostática/cirurgia , Próstata/cirurgia , Ressecção Transuretral da Próstata/métodos , Água , Estudos Prospectivos , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Técnicas de Ablação/métodos , Sintomas do Trato Urinário Inferior/cirurgia , Sintomas do Trato Urinário Inferior/complicações , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To present 6-month safety and effectiveness data from a multicentre prospective study of aquablation in men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) attributable to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with prostate volumes between 80 and 150 mL. METHODS: Between September and December 2017, 101 men with LUTSattributable to BPHwere prospectively enrolled at 16 centres in Canada and the USA. RESULTS: The mean prostate volume was 107 mL. The mean length of hospital stay after the aquablation procedure was 1.6 days (range: same day to 6 days). The primary safety endpoint (Clavien-Dindo grade 2 or higher or any grade 1 event resulting in persistent disability) at 3 months occurred in 45.5% of men, which met the study design goal of < 65% (P < 0.001). At 6 months, 22% of the patients had experienced a Clavien-Dindo grade 2, 14% a grade 3 and 5% a grade 4 adverse event. Bleeding complications requiring intervention and/or transfusion were recorded in eight patients prior to discharge and in six patients after discharge. The mean International Prostate Symptom Score improved from 23.2 ± 6.3 at baseline to 6.7 ± 5.1 at 3 months, meeting the study's primary efficacy endpoint goal (P < 0.001). The maximum urinary flow rate increased from 8.7 to 18.8 mL/s (P < 0.001) and post-void residual urine volume decreased from 131 at baseline to 47 at 6 months (P < 0.0001). At 6 months, prostate-specific antigen concentration reduced from 7.1 ± 5.9 ng/mL at baseline to 4.0 ± 3.9 ng/mL, a 44% reduction. CONCLUSIONS: Aquablation is safe and effective in treating men with larger prostates (80-150 mL), without significant increase in procedure or resection time.
Assuntos
Técnicas de Ablação , Hidroterapia , Hiperplasia Prostática/patologia , Hiperplasia Prostática/terapia , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Tamanho do Órgão , Estudos Prospectivos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
Purpose It is clinically challenging to integrate genomic-classifier results that report a numeric risk of recurrence into treatment recommendations for localized prostate cancer, which are founded in the framework of risk groups. We aimed to develop a novel clinical-genomic risk grouping system that can readily be incorporated into treatment guidelines for localized prostate cancer. Materials and Methods Two multicenter cohorts (n = 991) were used for training and validation of the clinical-genomic risk groups, and two additional cohorts (n = 5,937) were used for reclassification analyses. Competing risks analysis was used to estimate the risk of distant metastasis. Time-dependent c-indices were constructed to compare clinicopathologic risk models with the clinical-genomic risk groups. Results With a median follow-up of 8 years for patients in the training cohort, 10-year distant metastasis rates for National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) low, favorable-intermediate, unfavorable-intermediate, and high-risk were 7.3%, 9.2%, 38.0%, and 39.5%, respectively. In contrast, the three-tier clinical-genomic risk groups had 10-year distant metastasis rates of 3.5%, 29.4%, and 54.6%, for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk, respectively, which were consistent in the validation cohort (0%, 25.9%, and 55.2%, respectively). C-indices for the clinical-genomic risk grouping system (0.84; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.93) were improved over NCCN (0.73; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.86) and Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (0.74; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.84), and 30% of patients using NCCN low/intermediate/high would be reclassified by the new three-tier system and 67% of patients would be reclassified from NCCN six-tier (very-low- to very-high-risk) by the new six-tier system. Conclusion A commercially available genomic classifier in combination with standard clinicopathologic variables can generate a simple-to-use clinical-genomic risk grouping that more accurately identifies patients at low, intermediate, and high risk for metastasis and can be easily incorporated into current guidelines to better risk-stratify patients.