Treatment of male stress urinary incontinence at time of inflatable penile prosthesis placement a review of contemporary literature.

Background and Objective: Male stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and erectile dysfunction (ED) are well established diagnoses within Men's Health, often more specifically within the prostate cancer survivorship cohort. Taken individually, well defined treatment algorithms exist with which many surgeons are comfortable; however, treatment of both in a single setting or staged fashion introduces complexity. Emerging treatment options also exist, and there is immature or minimal data when these are combined with inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) insertion, radiation history, and/or variable degrees of incontinence. Our objective was to describe and summarize the currently available treatment options for SUI particularly at the time of IPP insertion. Methods: A literature review was performed to summarize contemporary treatment of SUI at time of IPP placement. Anecdotal experience was added from high volume, subspecialty trained Men's Health and Reconstructive Urologists. Key Content and Findings: Non-invasive approaches such as pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT), behavioral modification, and external compression devices play some limited role in treatment and/or management of SUI, particularly in the early post operative period, or for those unwilling or unable to undergo more definitive intervention. More invasive options such as artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation, male sling, or other implantable devices are more appropriate for good surgical candidates with higher bother and/or more severe incontinence. These options can be concomitant or staged relative to IPP placement. Climacturia, particularly with mild or no bothersome SUI, can successfully be addressed at the time of penile prosthesis placement with the utilization of the Mini-Jupette suburethral sling. Conclusions: A variety of treatment options exist for concomitant treatment of SUI at time of IPP, and both safety and efficacy have been demonstrated for many in the same operative setting. As with treatment of ED or SUI in isolation, patient selection, careful counseling, and management of expectations can lead to high patient satisfaction.

Using Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) Scores to Select an Optimal Prostate Biopsy Method: A Secondary Analysis of the Trio Study.

BACKGROUND: While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy (TBx) results in better prostate cancer (PCa) detection relative to systematic biopsy (SBx), the combination of both methods increases clinically significant PCa detection relative to either Bx method alone. However, combined Bx subjects patients to higher number of Bx cores and greater detection of clinically insignificant PCa. OBJECTIVE: To determine if prebiopsy prostate MRI can identify men who could forgo combined Bx without a substantial risk of missing clinically significant PCa (csPC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Men with MRI-visible prostate lesions underwent combined TBx plus SBx. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary outcomes were detection rates for grade group (GG) ≥2 and GG ≥3 PCa by TBx and SBx, stratified by Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Among PI-RADS 5 cases, nearly all csPCs were detected by TBx, as adding SBx resulted in detection of only 2.5% more GG ≥2 cancers. Among PI-RADS 3-4 cases, however, SBx addition resulted in detection of substantially more csPCs than TBx alone (8% vs 7.5%). Conversely, TBx added little to detection of csPC among men with PI-RADS 2 lesions (2%) relative to SBx (7.8%). CONCLUSIONS: While combined Bx increases the detection of csPC among men with MRI-visible prostate lesions, this benefit was largely restricted to PI-RADS 3-4 lesions. Using a strategy of TBx only for PI-RADS 5 and combined Bx only for PI-RADS 3-4 would avoid excess biopsies for men with PI-RADS 5 lesions while resulting in a low risk of missing csPC (1%). PATIENT SUMMARY: Our study investigated an optimized strategy to diagnose aggressive prostate cancer in men with an abnormal prostate MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) scan while minimizing the risk of excess biopsies. We used a scoring system for MRI scan images called PI-RADS. The results show that MRI-targeted biopsies alone could be used for men with a PI-RADS score of 5, while men with a PI-RADS score of 3 or 4 would benefit from a combination of MRI-targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT00102544.

Future perspective of focal therapy for localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the recent literature discussing focal therapy for localized prostate cancer. METHODS: A thorough literature review was performed using PubMed to identify recent studies involving focal therapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. RESULTS: In an effort to decrease the morbidity associated with prostate cancer treatment, many urologists are turning to focal therapy as an alternative treatment option. With this approach, the cancer bearing portion of the prostate is targeted while leaving the benign tissue untouched. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging remains the gold standard for visualization during focal therapy, but new imaging modalities such as prostate specific membrane antigen/positron emission tomography and contrast enhanced ultrasound are being investigated. Furthermore, several biomarkers, such as prostate cancer antigen 3 and prostate health index, are used in conjunction with imaging to improve risk stratification prior to focal therapy. Lastly, there are several novel technologies such as nanoparticles and transurethral devices that are under investigation for use in focal therapy. CONCLUSION: Focal therapy is proving to be a promising option for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. However, further study is needed to determine the true efficacy of these exciting new technologies.

The utilization of perfused cadaver simulation in urologic training: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine if participating in a surgical training session using perfused fresh human cadavers (PFHC) had a positive effect on urology residents' confidence in performing open and endoscopic procedures. METHODS: Urology residents at our institution participated in a surgical training session in the West Virginia University Fresh Tissue Training Program, which utilized fresh cadavers with vascular perfusion. The session consisted of performing different urologic procedures (open and endoscopic) on the perfused fresh human cadavers (PFHC). Residents were given a survey to rate their confidence in different urologic procedures before, after, and 6 months after the session. Each procedure on the survey had 3-6 questions associated with it, with scores ranging from 0 (no confidence) to 4 (great confidence). Scores for each procedure before and after the session were compared. RESULTS: Six residents participated in the session. There was an increase in the score for every procedure performed after the session. Scores at 6 month follow up remained higher than the pre-session scores. CONCLUSION: PFHCs offer an excellent opportunity to teach a wide variety of urologic procedures to residents. Incorporation of PFHCs may be very useful in urologic training, and further studies on its use are warranted.

The Risk of Prostate Cancer Progression in Active Surveillance Patients with Bilateral Disease Detected by Combined Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Fusion and Systematic Biopsy.

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.

Changes in Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using the Prostate Cancer Radiologic Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation Criteria to Detect Prostate Cancer Progression for Men on Active Surveillance.

BACKGROUND: The ability of serial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to capture pathologic progression during active surveillance (AS) remains in question. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether changes in MRI are associated with pathologic progression for patients on AS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: From July 2007 through January 2020, we identified all patients evaluated for AS at our institution. Following confirmatory biopsy, a total of 391 patients who underwent surveillance MRI and biopsy at least once were identified (median follow-up of 35.6 mo, interquartile range 19.7-60.6). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: All MRI intervals were scored using the "Prostate Cancer Radiologic Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation" (PRECISE) criteria, with PRECISE scores =4 considered a positive change in MRI. A generalized estimating equation-based logistic regression analysis was conducted for all intervals with a PRECISE score of <4 to determine the predictors of Gleason grade group (GG) progression despite stable MRI. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 621 MRI intervals were scored by PRECISE and validated by biopsy. The negative predictive value of stable MRI (PRECISE score <4) was greatest for detecting GG1 to?=?GG3 disease (0.94 [0.91-0.97]). If 2-yr surveillance biopsy were performed exclusively for a positive change in MRI, 3.7% (4/109) of avoided biopsies would have resulted in missed progression from GG1 to?=?GG3 disease. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density (odds ratio 1.95 [1.17-3.25], p?=? 0.01) was a risk factor for progression from GG1 to =GG3 disease despite stable MRI. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with GG1 disease and stable MRI (PRECISE score <4) on surveillance, grade progression to?=?GG3 disease is not common. In patients with grade progression detected on biopsy despite stable MRI, elevated PSA density appeared to be a risk factor for progression to?=?GG3 disease. PATIENT SUMMARY: For patients with low-risk prostate cancer on active surveillance, the risk of progressing to grade group 3 disease is low with a stable magnetic resonance image (MRI) after 2?yr. Having higher prostate-specific antigen density increases the risk of progression, despite having a stable MRI.

Contemporary management of advanced prostate cancer: an evolving landscape.

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.

Making a case "for" focal therapy of the prostate in intermediate risk prostate cancer: current perspective and ongoing trials.

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.

Role of multiparametric prostate MRI in the management of prostate cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Prostate cancer has traditionally been diagnosed by an elevation in PSA or abnormal exam leading to a systematic transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsy. This diagnostic pathway underdiagnoses clinically significant disease while over diagnosing clinically insignificant disease. In this review, we aim to provide an overview of the recent literature regarding the role of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) in the management of prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A thorough literature review was performed using PubMed to identify articles discussing use of mpMRI of the prostate in management of prostate cancer. CONCLUSION: The incorporation of mpMRI of the prostate addresses the shortcomings of the prostate biopsy while providing several other advantages. mpMRI allows some men to avoid an immediate biopsy and permits visualization of areas likely to harbor clinically significant cancer prior to biopsy to facilitate use of MR-targeted prostate biopsies. This allows for reduction in diagnosis of clinically insignificant disease as well as improved detection and better characterization of higher risk cancers, as well as the improved selection of patients for active surveillance. In addition, mpMRI can be used for selection and monitoring of patients for active surveillance and treatment planning during surgery and focal therapy.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted and Systematic Biopsy for Detection of Grade Progression in Patients on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer.

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.

Combined MRI-targeted Plus Systematic Confirmatory Biopsy Improves Risk Stratification for Patients Enrolling on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of combined MRI-targeted plus systematic 12-core biopsy (Cbx) to aid in the selection of patients for active surveillance (AS). METHODS: From July 2007 to January 2020, patients with Gleason Grade Group (GG) 1 or GG 2 prostate cancer were referred to our center for AS consideration. All patients underwent an MRI and confirmatory combined MRI-targeted plus systematic biopsy (Cbx), and AS outcomes based on Cbx results were compared. Cox regression was used to identify predictors of AS failure, defined as progression to ≥ GG3 disease on follow-up biopsies. RESULTS: Of 579 patients referred for AS, 79.3% (459/579) and 20.7% (120/579) had an initial diagnosis of GG1 and GG2 disease, respectively. Overall, 43.2% of patients (250/579) were upgraded on confirmatory Cbx, with 19.2% (111/579) upgraded to ≥ GG3. For the 226 patients followed on AS, 32.7% (74/226) had benign, 45.6% (103/226) had GG1, and 21.7% (49/226) had GG2 results on confirmatory Cbx. In total, 28.8% (65/226) of patients eventually progressed to ≥ GG3, with a median time to AS failure of 89 months. The median time from confirmatory Cbx to AS failure for the negative, GG1, and GG2 groups were 97, 97, and 32 months, respectively (p < .001). On multivariable regression, only age (hazard ratio 1.06 [1.02-1.11], p < .005) and GG on confirmatory Cbx (hazard ratio 2.75 [1.78-4.26], p < .005) remained as positive predictors of AS failure. CONCLUSION: The confirmatory combined MRI-targeted plus systematic biopsy provides useful information for the risk stratification of patients at the time of AS enrollment.

Focal therapy for prostate cancer: recent advances and future directions.

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.

Salvage robotic transmesenteric off-clamp partial nephrectomy after multiple prior open kidney surgeries.

Repeat renal surgery is technically demanding with a high morbidity rate. We describe a novel surgical approach, a salvage robotic transmesenteric off-clamp partial nephrectomy for the management of a renal cell carcinoma in a patient with a history of VHL and multiple prior renal surgeries on the affected kidney. Upon pathological review, the specimen was diagnosed as clear cell RCC, Fuhrman Grade 3, with negative surgical margins. The patient suffered no post-operative complications and had a rapid convalescence. This approach is a feasible and safe alternative in select patients with a significant history of renal surgeries and favorable anatomy.

MRI-guided pelvic lymph node biopsy via transrectal approach in prostate cancer.

Lymph node assessment in prostate cancer is most commonly performed at the time of radical prostatectomy. We present the case of pre-operative pelvic lymph node sampling with the use of MRI/TRUS fusion-guided biopsy at the time of prostate biopsy. Lymph node pathology revealed metastatic, poorly differentiated prostate cancer, concurrent with Gleason 4 + 5 disease showing perineural invasion. The use of MRI fusion guided biopsy for nodal sampling may be an effective method pre-operative staging and treatment planning for prostate adenocarcinoma.