Incidental para-ureteral aggressive angiomyxoma: a rare case report and literature review.

BACKGROUND: Aggressive angiomyxoma (AA) is a rare tumor that typically occurs in the pelvis and perineum, most commonly in women of reproductive age. However, no para-ureteral AA has been reported according to the literature. Case presentation We herein describe the first case of para-ureteral AA. A 62-year-old male presented to our institute in March 2017 with a para-ureteral mass that was 15 mm in diameter incidentally. No symptom was observed and laboratory analysis was unremarkable. Magnetic resonance and computed tomography imaging showed a non-enhancing mass abutting the left ureter without causing obstruction. Laparoscopic resection of the mass was performed without injury to the ureter. Pathologic and immunohistochemical results were consistent with AA. Till now, no recurrence was noticed. CONCLUSIONS: We reported a rare case of para-ureteral AA, along with a literature review. Early diagnosis, proper surgical plan and long-term close follow-up is recommended for its high risk of recurrence and malignant potential.

Impact of peri-prostatic fat measurements using MRI on the prediction of prostate cancer with transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the impact of peri-prostatic fat (PPF) measurements using preoperative magnetic resonance imaging on the prediction of prostate cancer (PCa) with transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective 2-center study on 660 consecutive patients receiving transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy-biopsy from June 2016 to October 2018. Pathologic and immunohistochemical characteristics were collected. PPF measurements including PPF area (PPFA) and PPFA to prostate area (PA) ratio (PPFA/PA) were assessed by preoperative staging magnetic resonance imaging. Clinical variables were correlated with Gleason score by using Spearman (ρ) correlation coefficients. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of PCa. The diagnostic performance was estimated using ROC curves. RESULTS: The Gleason score was significantly correlated with age (ρ = 0.114, P = 0.035), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (ρ = 0.482, P < 0.001), PIRADS scoring (ρ = 0.403, P < 0.001) and PPFA/PA (ρ = 0.238, P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that PPFA/PA, age, digital rectal examination, family history of PCa, PSA, and PIRADS scoring were independently predictive of PCa. The ROC AUC to detect PCa or clinically significant PCa (CS-PCa; Gleason Score 3 + 4 or greater) improved with the addition of PPFA/PA (PCa: 0.93 vs. 0.89; CS-PCa: 0.92 vs. 0.90). CONCLUSION: PPFA/PA is an independent predictor for PCa along with age, digital rectal examination, family history of PCa, PSA, and PIRADS scoring. PPF measurements especially PPFA/PA may help detect PCa or CS-PCa, thus helping improve PCa risk stratification and screening to avoid unnecessary biopsies.