Randomized clinical trial on the use of IMAGE1 S LIGHT (SPIES) vs. white light in the prevention of recurrence during transurethral resection of bladder tumors: Analysis after 12-month follow-up.

INTRODUCTION: The improved image resolution of IMAGE1 S technology will increase tumor detection, achieve a greater number of complete resections, and would probably have an impact on the reduction of recurrences. AIM: The primary objective was to compare the recurrence rates of IMAGE1 S vs. white light during transurethral resection of the bladder (TUR); the secondary objective was to compare the complication rates according to Clavien-Dindo (CD) at 12 months of follow-up. METHODS: Prospective, randomized 1:1, blinded clinical trial. Recurrence and complication rates according to CD were analyzed using chi-square/U Mann-Whitney tests and recurrence-free survival (RFS) using Kaplan-Meier curves. The European Association of Urology (EAU) 2021 scoring model was used. RESULTS: The analysis included 103 participants; 49 were assigned to the IMAGE1 S group and 54 to the white light group. Recurrence rates were 12.2% and 25.9%, respectively (P = .080). The low and intermediate risk group had a lower recurrence rate with IMAGE1 S (7.7% vs. 30.8%, P = .003) and a higher RFS with IMAGE1 S (85.2% vs. 62.8% Log Rank: 0.021), with a Hazard Ratio of 0.215 (95% CI: 0.046-0.925). No differences were observed in the high and very high-risk groups. Complications were mostly grade I and rates were similar between both groups (IMAGE1 S 20.4% vs. white light 7.4% P = .083). CONCLUSIONS: There were no differences in the recurrence rates between groups. However, the low and intermediate risk group had a lower recurrence rate with IMAGE1 S. In addition, perioperative complication rates were not higher.

Cáncer de próstata resistente a la castración no metastásico: recomendaciones de manejo / Non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: management recommendations

Introducción y objetivo: La supervivencia y calidad de vida (QoL) de los pacientes con cáncer de próstata resistente a la castración no metastásico (CPRCnm) se deteriora de forma muy significativa cuando llegan a desarrollar metástasis. Los antiandrógenos de nueva generación (apalutamida, enzalutamida y darolutamida) pueden prolongar la supervivencia libre de metástasis (SLM) y la supervivencia global (SG) en estos pacientes, manteniendo su QoL.Material y método: Tras una revisión sistemática de la literatura, un comité científico alcanzó un consenso sobre recomendaciones sencillas y prácticas que unifiquen y mejoren el manejo de los pacientes con CPRCnm en las consultas de urología.Resultados: Se dan recomendaciones sobre la frecuencia de determinación de antígeno prostático específico (PSA) y pruebas de imagen en pacientes con CPRCnm. También se destaca la importancia de las comorbilidades en el paciente con CPRCnm y se ofrecen recomendaciones sobre la valoración funcional y de la QoL que se pueden llevar a cabo en la consulta de urología. Se revisa la eficacia, seguridad y efectos sobre la QoL de los antiandrógenos de nueva generación.Conclusiones: Para la evaluación del tratamiento de pacientes con CPRCnm, es necesario tener en cuenta no solo la edad, sino también las comorbilidades y la QoL. Los antiandrógenos de nueva generación son una opción de tratamiento segura y eficaz en los pacientes con CPRCnm. Las recomendaciones de trabajo pueden servir de ayuda para optimizar su manejo de los pacientes con CPRCnm en las consultas de urología. (AU)

Introduction and objective: Survival and quality of life (QoL) of patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) deteriorate significantly when they develop metastases. New generation antiandrogens (apalutamide, enzalutamide and darolutamide) can prolong metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) in these patients, maintaining their QoL.Material and methods: After the performance of a systematic review of the literature, a scientific committee reached a consensus on simple and practical recommendations to consolidate and improve the management of patients with nmCRPC in urology consultations.Results: Recommendations are made on the frequency of PSA determination and imaging tests in patients with nmCRPC. The importance of co-morbidities in patients with nmCRPC is also highlighted, and recommendations are also made on functional and QoL assessment that can be carried out during urology consultations. The efficacy, safety, and effects on QoL of new generation antiandrogens are reviewed.Conclusions: To evaluate treatment of patients with nmCRPC, it is necessary to consider co-morbidities and QoL, in addition to age. New generation antiandrogens are a safe and effective treatment option for patients with nmCRPC. The recommendations of this review can be helpful in optimizing the management of nmCRPC patients in urology consultations. (AU)

Non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: management recommendations.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Survival and quality of life (QoL) of patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) deteriorate significantly when they develop metastases. New generation antiandrogens (apalutamide, enzalutamide and darolutamide) can prolong metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) in these patients, maintaining their QoL. MATERIAL AND METHODS: After the performance of a systematic review of the literature, a scientific committee reached a consensus on simple and practical recommendations to consolidate and improve the management of patients with nmCRPC in urology consultations. RESULTS: Recommendations are made on the frequency of PSA determination and imaging tests in patients with nmCRPC. The importance of co-morbidities in patients with nmCRPC is also highlighted, and recommendations are also made on functional and QoL assessment that can be carried out during urology consultations. The efficacy, safety, and effects on QoL of new generation antiandrogens are reviewed. CONCLUSIONS: To evaluate treatment of patients with nmCRPC, it is necessary to consider co-morbidities and QoL, in addition to age. New generation antiandrogens are a safe and effective treatment option for patients with nmCRPC. The recommendations of this review can be helpful in optimizing the management of nmCRPC patients in urology consultations.

Evaluación de la teleconsulta en el paciente urológico durante la pandemia COVID-19 / Evaluation of teleconsultation system in the urological patient during the COVID-19 pandemic

INTRODUCCIÓN: La pandemia global de COVID-19 ha provocado una rápida implantación de la telemedicina, pero existe escasa información sobre la satisfacción percibida por el paciente como alternativa a la asistencia presencial. OBJETIVO: Se evalúa la satisfacción del paciente urológico con la teleconsulta durante la pandemia COVID-19. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Estudio observacional, prospectivo transversal, no intervencionista, mediante encuesta telefónica durante el periodo considerado pico de pandemia (marzo-abril 2020). Se realiza una encuesta de calidad compuesta por 11 preguntas sobre la atención urológica durante la pandemia COVID-19 por los facultativos, seleccionando una muestra representativa de los pacientes atendidos en el periodo por teleconsulta. RESULTADOS: Doscientos pacientes fueron contactados telefónicamente para responder a una encuesta de calidad sobre teleconsulta. La distribución de pacientes encuestados entre las consultas monográficas fue homogénea entre el número de consultas citadas en el periodo, requiriendo el 18% de ellos ayuda por familiar. El 60% de los pacientes evitaron acudir a un centro médico durante la pandemia. El 42% de los pacientes encuestados tenían cancelada alguna prueba complementaria, el 59% alguna consulta médica, el 3,5% tratamientos y el 1% intervenciones. El 10% apreciaron un empeoramiento de su sintomatología urológica durante el confinamiento. La resolución subjetiva de la consulta por el facultativo fue alcanzada en el 72% de los casos, siendo la teleconsulta por el urólogo habitual en el 81%. El grado de satisfacción global con la teleconsulta fue de 9 (RIQ 8-10), considerando la teleconsulta como una «opción de asistencia sanitaria» pasada la crisis sanitaria por el 61,5% de los encuestados. CONCLUSIÓN: La teleconsulta ha sido valorada con un alto grado de satisfacción durante la pandemia COVID-19, ofreciendo asistencia continuada a los pacientes urológicos durante la crisis sanitaria. La calidad percibida ofrece un campo de asistencia telemática opcional en pacientes seleccionados, que debe reevaluarse fuera de una situación de confinamiento

INTRODUCTION: The global pandemic of COVID-19 has led to rapid implementation of telemedicine, but there is little information on patient satisfaction of this system as an alternative to face-to-face care. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate urological patient satisfaction with teleconsultation during the COVID-19 pandemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Observational, prospective, cross-sectional, non-interventional study carried out by telephone survey during the period considered as the peak of the pandemic (March-April 2020). A quality survey composed of 11 questions on urological care provided by physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic was conducted, selecting a representative sample of patients attended by teleconsultation. RESULTS: Two hundred patients were contacted by telephone to answer a survey on the quality of teleconsultation. The distribution of patients surveyed among the specialized consultations was homogeneous with the number of consultations cited in the period; 18% of them required assistance from family members. Sixty percent of patients avoided going to a medical center during the pandemic. Of the surveyed patients, 42% had cancelled diagnostic tests, 59% had cancelled medical consultations, 3.5% had cancelled treatments and 1% had cancelled interventions. Ten percent reported a worsening of urological symptoms during confinement. According to physicians, consultations were effectively delivered in 72% of cases, with teleconsultation being carried out by their usual urologist in 81%. Teleconsultation overall satisfaction level was 9 (IQI8-10), and 61.5% of respondents consider teleconsultation as a «health care option» after the healthcare crisis. CONCLUSION: Teleconsultation has been evaluated with a high level of satisfaction during the COVID-19 pandemic, offering continuous care to urological patients during the healthcare crisis. The perceived quality offers a field of optional telematic assistance in selected patients, which should be re-evaluated in a period without confinement measures

Experiencia inicial del uso de SelectMDx(R) en el diagnóstico de cáncer de próstata en un entorno de práctica clínica habitual «real-world evidence» / Initial experience with SelectMDx(R) in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in a real-world evidence clinical practice setting

INTRODUCCIÓN: El uso de biomarcadores en la detección del cáncer de próstata (CP) puede disminuir el sobrediagnóstico y sobretratamiento de CP no significativos. Analizamos la utilidad y aplicabilidad del marcador SelectMDx® en un entorno de práctica clínica habitual. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Estudio retrospectivo de 48 pacientes evaluados mediante el test SelectMDx® entre julio de 2017 y abril de 2019. Los pacientes se estratificaron en dos grupos según el riesgo estimado por el test de CP clínicamente significativo (CP-CS): < 2% o «muy bajo riesgo», y > 2%. Los resultados se expresaron en función de los antecedentes de biopsia prostática (BP) y resonancia magnética multiparamétrica (RMmp). RESULTADOS: En pacientes con BP negativa y RMmp normal/dudosa el riesgo fue < 2% en 7/9 casos. En pacientes sin BP y RMmp normal/dudosa el riesgo fue < 2% en 12/18 casos, y 2/6 casos con un riesgo % presentaron un CP-CS. De los 14 pacientes sin BP ni RMmp previas, 9 presentaron un riesgo < 2%, con 2 casos diagnosticados de CP en los 5 pacientes con riesgo > 2%. En el resto de subgrupos el número de pacientes es pequeño como para poder extraer conclusiones. En todos los casos con tacto rectal patológico el test demostraba un riesgo de padecer CP > 2%. CONCLUSIÓN: SelectMDx® es un test prometedor para detectar pacientes con un riesgo muy bajo de CP-CS, especialmente en pacientes con sospecha de CP con o sin BP negativas, en los que la RMmp muestre un resultado normal/dudoso. La presencia de un tacto rectal patológico puede condicionar el resultado del test

INTRODUCTION: The use of biomarkers in the detection of prostate cancer (PC) can decrease overdiagnosis and overtreatment of non-significant PC. We analyze the usefulness and applicability of the SelectMDx® marker in a routine clinical practice setting. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective study of 48 patients evaluated by the SelectMDx® test between July 2017 and April 2019. Patients were stratified into two groups according to the risk estimated by the clinically significant CP test (CS-PC): < 2% or 'very low risk', and > 2%. Results were expressed based on previous prostate biopsy (PB) and multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) outcomes. RESULTS: Patients with negative PB and normal/doubtful mpMRI had < 2% risk in 7/9 cases. Patients without PB and normal/doubtful mpMRI had < 2% risk in 12/18 cases, and 2/6 cases with a > 2% risk presented CS-PC. Of the 14 patients with no previous PB or mpMRI, 9 had < 2% risk, and 2 cases were diagnosed with PC from the group of patients (5) with risk >2%. The number of patients in the remaining subgroups is too small to draw any conclusions. In all cases with pathological digital rectal examination, the test showed a > 2% PC risk. CONCLUSION: SelectMDx® is a promising test for detecting patients with a very low risk of CS-PC, especially in patients with suspected PC, with or without negative PB, with normal/doubtful mpMRI. The presence of a pathological digital rectal examination may condition the result of the test

Evaluation of teleconsultation system in the urological patient during the COVID-19 pandemic. / Evaluación de la teleconsulta en el paciente urológico durante la pandemia COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The global pandemic of COVID-19 has led to rapid implementation of telemedicine, but there is little information on patient satisfaction of this system as an alternative to face-to-face care. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate urological patient satisfaction with teleconsultation during the COVID-19 pandemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Observational, prospective, cross-sectional, non-interventional study carried out by telephone survey during the period considered as the peak of the pandemic (March-April 2020). A quality survey composed of 11 questions on urological care provided by physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic was conducted, selecting a representative sample of patients attended by teleconsultation. RESULTS: Two hundred patients were contacted by telephone to answer a survey on the quality of teleconsultation. The distribution of patients surveyed among the specialized consultations was homogeneous with the number of consultations cited in the period; 18% of them required assistance from family members. Sixty percent of patients avoided going to a medical center during the pandemic. Of the surveyed patients, 42% had cancelled diagnostic tests, 59% had cancelled medical consultations, 3.5% had cancelled treatments and 1% had cancelled interventions. Ten percent reported a worsening of urological symptoms during confinement. According to physicians, consultations were effectively delivered in 72% of cases, with teleconsultation being carried out by their usual urologist in 81%. Teleconsultation overall satisfaction level was 9 (IQI8-10), and 61.5% of respondents consider teleconsultation as a «health care option¼ after the healthcare crisis. CONCLUSION: Teleconsultation has been evaluated with a high level of satisfaction during the COVID-19 pandemic, offering continuous care to urological patients during the healthcare crisis. The perceived quality offers a field of optional telematic assistance in selected patients, which should be re-evaluated in a period without confinement measures.

Initial experience with SelectMDx® in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in a real-world evidence clinical practice setting. / Experiencia inicial del uso de SelectMDx® en el diagnóstico de cáncer de próstata en un entorno de práctica clínica habitual «real-world evidence¼.

INTRODUCTION: The use of biomarkers in the detection of prostate cancer (PC) can decrease overdiagnosis and overtreatment of non-significant PC. We analyze the usefulness and applicability of the SelectMDx® marker in a routine clinical practice setting. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective study of 48 patients evaluated by the SelectMDx® test between July 2017 and April 2019. Patients were stratified into two groups according to the risk estimated by the clinically significant CP test (CS-PC): <2% or 'very low risk', and >2%. Results were expressed based on previous prostate biopsy (PB) and multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) outcomes. RESULTS: Patients with negative PB and normal/doubtful mpMRI had <2% risk in 7/9 cases. Patients without PB and normal/doubtful mpMRI had <2% risk in 12/18 cases, and 2/6 cases with a >2% risk presented CS-PC. Of the 14 patients with no previous PB or mpMRI, 9 had <2% risk, and 2 cases were diagnosed with PC from the group of patients (5) with risk >2%. The number of patients in the remaining subgroups is too small to draw any conclusions. In all cases with pathological digital rectal examination, the test showed a >2% PC risk. CONCLUSION: SelectMDx® is a promising test for detecting patients with a very low risk of CS-PC, especially in patients with suspected PC, with or without negative PB, with normal/doubtful mpMRI. The presence of a pathological digital rectal examination may condition the result of the test.

Metodología de una revisión sistemática / Methodology of a systematic review

Contexto: La medicina basada en la evidencia tiene como objetivo apoyarse en la mejor información científica disponible para aplicarla a la práctica clínica. Entender e interpretar la evidencia científica implica conocer los niveles de evidencia disponibles, donde las revisiones sistemáticas y/o metaanálisis de ensayos clínicos son la cúspide de la pirámide del nivel de evidencia. Adquisición de la evidencia: El proceso de revisión debe estar bien desarrollado y planificado de antemano para reducir sesgos y eliminar estudios irrelevantes o de baja calidad. Los pasos a seguir para la realización de una revisión sistemática incluyen: (I) formular correctamente la pregunta clínica a responder (PICO), (II) desarrollo de un protocolo (criterios de inclusión y exclusión), (III) realizar una búsqueda bibliográfica detallada y amplia, (IV) cribar los resúmenes de los trabajos identificados en la búsqueda y posteriormente de los textos completos seleccionados (PRISMA). Síntesis de la evidencia: Una vez seleccionados los estudios se debe: (V) extraer en un formulario diseñado en el protocolo los datos necesarios para resumir los estudios incluidos, (VI) evaluar los sesgos de cada estudio pudiendo identificar la calidad de la evidencia disponible y, por último, (VII) desarrollar las tablas y el texto que sinteticen la evidencia. Conclusiones: Una revisión sistemática implica un resumen crítico y reproducible de los resultados de las publicaciones disponibles sobre un mismo tema o pregunta clínica concreta. Con el fin de mejorar la escritura científica, se expone de una forma estructurada la metodología para la realización de una revisión sistemática

Context: The objective of evidence-based medicine is to employ the best scientific information available to apply to clinical practice. Understanding and interpreting the scientific evidence involves understanding the available levels of evidence, where systematic reviews and meta-analyses of clinical trials are at the top of the levels-of-evidence pyramid. Acquisition of evidence: The review process should be well developed and planned to reduce biases and eliminate irrelevant and low-quality studies. The steps for implementing a systematic review include (I) correctly formulating the clinical question to answer (PICO), (II) developing a protocol (inclusion and exclusion criteria), (III) performing a detailed and broad literature search and (IV) screening the abstracts of the studies identified in the search and subsequently of the selected complete texts (PRISMA). Synthesis of the evidence: Once the studies have been selected, we need to (V) extract the necessary data into a form designed in the protocol to summarise the included studies, (VI) assess the biases of each study, identifying the quality of the available evidence, and (VII) develop tables and text that synthesise the evidence. Conclusions: A systematic review involves a critical and reproducible summary of the results of the available publications on a particular topic or clinical question. To improve scientific writing, the methodology is shown in a structured manner to implement a systematic review

Methodology of a systematic review. / Metodología de una revisión sistemática.

CONTEXT: The objective of evidence-based medicine is to employ the best scientific information available to apply to clinical practice. Understanding and interpreting the scientific evidence involves understanding the available levels of evidence, where systematic reviews and meta-analyses of clinical trials are at the top of the levels-of-evidence pyramid. ACQUISITION OF EVIDENCE: The review process should be well developed and planned to reduce biases and eliminate irrelevant and low-quality studies. The steps for implementing a systematic review include (i) correctly formulating the clinical question to answer (PICO), (ii) developing a protocol (inclusion and exclusion criteria), (iii) performing a detailed and broad literature search and (iv) screening the abstracts of the studies identified in the search and subsequently of the selected complete texts (PRISMA). SYNTHESIS OF THE EVIDENCE: Once the studies have been selected, we need to (v) extract the necessary data into a form designed in the protocol to summarise the included studies, (vi) assess the biases of each study, identifying the quality of the available evidence, and (vii) develop tables and text that synthesise the evidence. CONCLUSIONS: A systematic review involves a critical and reproducible summary of the results of the available publications on a particular topic or clinical question. To improve scientific writing, the methodology is shown in a structured manner to implement a systematic review.

Indicación de cistectomía precoz en el cáncer vesical no músculo infiltrante. Revisión de la literatura / Indication for early cystectomy in nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer. Literature review

Contexto: El cáncer vesical no músculo infiltrante de alto riesgo es una enfermedad que integra un grupo heterogéneo de pacientes, en los que se recomienda un seguimiento estrecho debido al riesgo de progresión a tumor músculo infiltrante. El tratamiento de elección de estos tumores es la resección transuretral de vejiga seguido de un programa de instilaciones con BCG. Existe un subgrupo de pacientes que tiene un mayor riesgo de progresión, y que se benefician de un tratamiento radical de inicio. Objetivo: Identificar qué grupo de pacientes con cáncer vesical no músculo infiltrante se benefician de un tratamiento radical precoz. Búsqueda de la evidencia: Se realizó una revisión bibliográfica para identificar los factores de riesgo de progresión de estos pacientes, y así poder recomendar un tratamiento que mejore su tasa de supervivencia. Síntesis de la evidencia: Se identificaron los diferentes factores pronósticos asociados a progresión tumoral: la persistencia de tumor T1 en la re-resección transuretral de vejiga, la presencia de carcinoma in situ, refractariedad al tratamiento con BCG, los mayores de 70 años, los tumores mayores 3cm, la subestadificación de los tumores T1, la presencia de invasión linfovascular y la presencia de tumor en la uretra prostática. Igualmente se comentan las ventajas del tratamiento radical frente al conservador, apreciando que la realización de una cistectomía precoz por un tumor vesical no infiltrante de alto riesgo tiene un mejor pronóstico oncológico en comparación con aquellos en los cuales se difiere la realización de la misma hasta la progresión. Conclusiones: En esta enfermedad es importante individualizar a los pacientes, para así ofrecerles un tratamiento personalizado. En pacientes con las características mencionadas previamente se recomienda no demorar la cistectomía precoz

Context: High-risk nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer is a disease that includes a heterogeneous group of patients, for whom close follow-up is recommended due to the risk of progression to a muscle-invasive tumour. The treatment of choice for these tumours is transurethral resection of the bladder tumour followed by a programme of bacillus Calmette-Guerin instillations. There is a subgroup of patients who have a greater risk of progression and who benefit from early radical treatment. Objective: To identify which patient group with nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer will benefit from early radical treatment. Searching the evidence: We performed a literature review to identify the risk factors for progression for these patients and thereby recommend a treatment that improves their survival rate. Synthesis of the evidence: We identified the various prognostic factors associated with tumour progression: the persistence of T1 tumour in re-resection of the bladder tumour, the presence of carcinoma in situ, patients refractory to bacillus Calmette-Guerin treatment, patients older than 70 years, tumours larger than 3 cm, the substaging of T1 tumours, the presence of lymphovascular invasion and the presence of a tumour in the prostatic urethra. Similarly, we comment on the advantages of radical versus conservative treatment, considering that the performance of an early cystectomy due to a high-risk noninvasive vesical tumour has a better cancer prognosis than those in which the operation is deferred until the progression. Conclusions: In this disease, it is important to individualise the patients to provide them personalized treatment. For patients with the previously mentioned characteristics, it is recommended that early cystectomy not be delayed

Indication for early cystectomy in nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer. Literature review. / Indicación de cistectomía precoz en el cáncer vesical no músculo infiltrante. Revisión de la literatura.

CONTEXT: High-risk nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer is a disease that includes a heterogeneous group of patients, for whom close follow-up is recommended due to the risk of progression to a muscle-invasive tumour. The treatment of choice for these tumours is transurethral resection of the bladder tumour followed by a programme of bacillus Calmette-Guerin instillations. There is a subgroup of patients who have a greater risk of progression and who benefit from early radical treatment. OBJECTIVE: To identify which patient group with nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer will benefit from early radical treatment. SEARCHING THE EVIDENCE: We performed a literature review to identify the risk factors for progression for these patients and thereby recommend a treatment that improves their survival rate. SYNTHESIS OF THE EVIDENCE: We identified the various prognostic factors associated with tumour progression: the persistence of T1 tumour in re-resection of the bladder tumour, the presence of carcinoma in situ, patients refractory to bacillus Calmette-Guerin treatment, patients older than 70 years, tumours larger than 3cm, the substaging of T1 tumours, the presence of lymphovascular invasion and the presence of a tumour in the prostatic urethra. Similarly, we comment on the advantages of radical versus conservative treatment, considering that the performance of an early cystectomy due to a high-risk noninvasive vesical tumour has a better cancer prognosis than those in which the operation is deferred until the progression. CONCLUSIONS: In this disease, it is important to individualise the patients to provide them personalized treatment. For patients with the previously mentioned characteristics, it is recommended that early cystectomy not be delayed.

Ultrasonido focalizado de alta intensidad con el dispositivo Focal-One(R): impacto sobre el antígeno prostático específico y evaluación de la morbilidad durante la experiencia inicial / High intensity focused ultrasound with Focal-One(R) device: prostate-specific antigen impact and morbidity evaluation during the initial experience

Objetivos: Reportamos nuestra experiencia inicial en el tratamiento del cáncer de próstata (PCa) con ultrasonido focalizado de alta intensidad (HIFU) utilizando el dispositivo Focal-One(R). Material y métodos: Estudio retrospectivo de datos recogidos prospectivamente. Entre junio de 2014 y octubre de 2015, 85 pacientes recibieron tratamiento HIFU (focal/total), para PCa localizado. La localización preoperatoria del tumor fue realizada con resonancia magnética multiparamétrica (mpMRI) y biopsias prostáticas mediante mapeo transperineal. El tratamiento fue realizado utilizando el dispositivo Focal-One(R)® bajo anestesia general. Seguimiento oncológico: medición del PSA y biopsia control con mpMRI según protocolo. Los resultados funcionales fueron evaluados mediante cuestionarios validados y las complicaciones reportadas utilizando la clasificación Clavien. Resultados: La mediana de PSA fue 7,79ng/ml (6,32-9,16) con una mediana de volumen prostático de 38cc (33-49,75). El tratamiento fue focal y total en 64 y 21 pacientes respectivamente. Diez pacientes recibieron tratamiento de rescate. La tasa de complicaciones fue del 15%, todas Clavien 2. La estancia hospitalaria media fue 1,8 días (0-7) y la sonda vesical fue retirada el día 2 (1-6). La media de reducción porcentual del PSA fue 54%. La mediana de seguimiento fue 3 meses (2-8). Resultados funcionales: todos los pacientes estuvieron continentes a los 3 meses y la potencia se mantuvo en el 83% de los previamente potentes. Conclusiones: El tratamiento HIFU Focal-One(R) es un procedimiento seguro con pocas complicaciones. Los resultados funcionales no reportan casos de incontinencia y la función sexual se mantuvo en el 83%

Objective: We report our initial experience in the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) with high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) using the Focal-One(R) device. Material and methods: Retrospective review of the prospectively populated database. Between June 2014 to October 2015, 85 patients underwent HIFU (focal/whole-gland) treatment for localized PCa. Preoperative cancer localization was done with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and transperineal mapping biopsies. Treatment was carried out using the Focal-One(R) device under general anesthesia. Oncological follow-up: PSA measurement and control biopsy with mpMRI according to protocol. Questionnaire-based functional outcome assessment was done. Complications were reported using Clavien classification. Results: The median PSA was 7.79ng/ml (IQR 6.32-9.16), with a median prostate volume of 38cc (IQR: 33-49.75). Focal and whole-gland therapy was performed in 64 and 21 patients respectively. Ten patients received salvage HIFU. Complications were encountered in 15% of cases, all Clavien 2 graded. Mean hospital stay was 1.8 days (0-7) and bladder catheter was removed on day 2 (1-6). Mean percentage reduction of PSA was 54%. Median follow-up was 3 months (IQR: 2-8). Functional outcomes: All patients were continents at 3 months and potency was maintained in 83% of the preoperatively potent. Conclusions: Focal-One(R) HIFU treatment appears to be a safe procedure with few complications. Functional outcomes proved no urinary incontinence and sexual function were maintained in 83%

Presentación perirrenal de la enfermedad de Rosai-Dorfman extranodal / Perirrenal presentation of extranodal Rosai-Dorfman disease

No disponible

High intensity focused ultrasound with Focal-One® device: Prostate-specific antigen impact and morbidity evaluation during the initial experience. / Ultrasonido focalizado de alta intensidad con el dispositivo Focal-One®: impacto sobre el antígeno prostático específico y evaluación de la morbilidad durante la experiencia inicial.

OBJECTIVE: We report our initial experience in the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) with high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) using the Focal-One® device. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective review of the prospectively populated database. Between June 2014 to October 2015, 85 patients underwent HIFU (focal/whole-gland) treatment for localized PCa. Preoperative cancer localization was done with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and transperineal mapping biopsies. Treatment was carried out using the Focal-One® device under general anesthesia. Oncological follow-up: PSA measurement and control biopsy with mpMRI according to protocol. Questionnaire-based functional outcome assessment was done. Complications were reported using Clavien classification. RESULTS: The median PSA was 7.79ng/ml (IQR 6.32-9.16), with a median prostate volume of 38cc (IQR: 33-49.75). Focal and whole-gland therapy was performed in 64 and 21 patients respectively. Ten patients received salvage HIFU. Complications were encountered in 15% of cases, all Clavien 2 graded. Mean hospital stay was 1.8 days (0-7) and bladder catheter was removed on day 2 (1-6). Mean percentage reduction of PSA was 54%. Median follow-up was 3 months (IQR: 2-8). Functional outcomes: All patients were continents at 3 months and potency was maintained in 83% of the preoperatively potent. CONCLUSIONS: Focal-One® HIFU treatment appears to be a safe procedure with few complications. Functional outcomes proved no urinary incontinence and sexual function were maintained in 83%.

[Localized prostate cancer Focal Therapy: "A la carte" Model]. / Tratamiento Focal del cáncer de próstata localizado: Modelo "À la carte".

Focal therapy has settled as an alternative to radical treatment in selected cases of localized prostate cancer. The selection of patients who are candidates for focal therapy is based on imaging diagnosis relying on multiparametric MRI and image fusion techniques. Thanks to the oncological results and safety profiles of initial series, various energy sources have been developed over the last years. The availability of multiple types of energy sources for focal therapy, commits us to evaluate what type of energy would be the optimal depending on patient's profile and type of lesion. A unique energy for focal therapy would be ideal, but facing the research of the various types of energy we must identify which one is recommended for each lesion. With the experience of our center in different approaches of focal therapy we propose the "A LA CARTE" MODEL based on localization of the lesion. We present the criteria the "a la carte" model is based on, supported by the published evidence on the use of different ablative therapies for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Lesion localization, technical characteristics of each type of energy, patient's profile and secondary effects must be considered in every choice of focal therapy.

Angiomixoma Agresivo Pélvico / Aggressive Pelvic Angiomyxoma

No disponible