Short Time Delay Between Previous Prostate Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Assessment and Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate Correlates with Worse Perioperative Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: No data are available regarding the impact of time between a previous transrectal prostate biopsy (PB) and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) on perioperative outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of time from PB to HoLEP on perioperative outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 172 consecutive patients treated with HoLEP within 12 mo of a single previous transrectal PB at two tertiary centers were included. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Patients were stratified into two groups according to the median time from PB to HoLEP (namely, ≤6 and >6 mo). The primary outcome was intraoperative complications. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to identify the predictors of intraoperative complications. Linear regressions were used to test the association between the time from PB to HoLEP and intraoperative complications, enucleation efficiency, and enucleation time. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 93 (54%) and 79 (46%) patients had PB ≤ 6 and >6 mo before HoLEP, respectively. Patients in PB ≤ 6 mo group experienced higher rates of intraoperative complications than those in PB > 6 mo group (14% vs 2.6%, p = 0.04). At multivariable analysis, time between PB and HoLEP was an independent predictor of intraoperative complications (odds ratio: 0.74; 95% confidence interval: 0.6-0.9; p = 0.006). Finally, the risk of intraoperative complications reduced by 1.5%, efficiency of enucleation increased by 4.1%, and enucleation time reduced by 1.7 min for each month passed from PB to HoLEP (all p ≤ 0.006). Selection of patients with only one previous PB represents the main limitation. CONCLUSIONS: The time from PB to HoLEP of ≤6 mo is associated with a higher risk of intraoperative complications, lower enucleation efficacy, and longer enucleation time. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with a prostate biopsy (PB) ≤6 mo before holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) had significantly worse outcomes than those with a PB > 6 mo before HoLEP.

Percutaneous ablation or minimally invasive partial nephrectomy for cT1a renal masses? A propensity score-matched analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Local tumor ablation to treat small renal mass is increasing. The aim of the present study was to compare oncologic outcomes among patients with T1 renal mass treated with partial nephrectomy and local tumor ablation. METHODS: To reduce the inherent differences between patients undergoing laparoscopic or robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (n = 405) and local tumor ablation (n = 137), we used a 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis. Local tumor ablation consisted of radiofrequency ablation and cryoablation. Disease-free survival, overall survival and other causes mortality-free survival rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable logistic regression and competing-risk regression models were used to identify predictors of complications, recurrence and other causes mortality, respectively. RESULTS: Partial nephrectomy had higher disease-free survival estimates, as compared with local tumor ablation (92.8% vs 80.4% at 5 years, P = 0.02), with no significant difference between radiofrequency ablation and cryoablation (P = 0.9). Ablation showed comparable overall survival estimates to partial nephrectomy (91% vs 95.8% at 5 years, P = 0.6). The 5-year recurrence rates were 7.9% versus 23.8% for patients aged ≤70 years, and 2.5% versus 11.9% for patients aged >70 years treated with partial nephrectomy and ablation, respectively; the 5-year other causes mortality rates were 0% and 2.2% for patients treated with partial nephrectomy and ablation aged ≤70 years, and 3% versus 10.9% for patients aged >70 years treated with partial nephrectomy and ablation, respectively. At multivariable analysis, ablation was associated with fewer complications (odds ratio 0.41; P = 0.01). At competing risks analysis, age (hazard ratio 0.96) and ablation (hazard ratio 4.56) were independent predictors of disease recurrence (all P ≤ 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Local tumor ablation showed a higher risk of recurrence and lower risk of complications compared with partial nephrectomy, with comparable overall survival rates.

The robotic approach improves the outcomes of ERAS protocol after radical cystectomy: A prospective case-control analysis.

BACKGROUND: Minimally-invasive approach is one of the mainstays of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) introduction has reduced the surgical burden on patient's recovery. Accordingly, ERAS protocol benefits may be more striking in RARC patients. We evaluated the impact of surgical approach on perioperative outcomes, Fast Track (FT) recovery steps and Trifecta success rates in patients undergoing RC followed by FT protocol. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We considered 147 patients who underwent RC, with open (Open radical cystectomy [ORC]; 47.6%) or robotic (RARC; 52.4%) approach at 2 tertiary centers. Urinary diversions were ileal conduit or orthotopic neobladder. All patients underwent FT protocol. We analyzed perioperative surgical and functional outcomes and Trifecta success rates (namely, defecation <5 days, in-hospital stay <10 days and no major complications). Uni and multivariable logistic regression explored the predictors for Trifecta success and the impact of surgical approach on recovery steps. RESULTS: Patients undergoing RARC had higher FT adherence (95% vs. 61%) compared to ORCs (P < 0.01). Trifecta success rates were higher for RARC (79.2% vs 28.6%; P < 0.001). At multivariable analyses, RARC was an independent predictor for Trifecta success (OR 9.1), early mobilization (OR 5.9) and FT adherence (OR 3.33; all P < 0.001). Surgical technique was not associated with major complications or readmission within 90 days (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: RARC has more favorable perioperative outcomes compared to ORC, with higher Trifecta success rates. Accordingly, robotic approach should be ideally included in every center where ERAS protocol is applied to RC for maximizing patient's recovery.