Single port robot-assisted pyeloplasty: An early comparative outcomes analysis.

BACKGROUND: The treatment paradigm for ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) has shifted towards minimally invasive pyeloplasty. A comparison Single Port (SP) and Multi Port (MP) robot-assisted pyeloplasty (RAP) was performed. METHODS: Data from consecutive patients undergoing SP RAP or MP RAP between January 2021 and September 2023 were collected and analysed. Co-primary outcomes were length of stay (LOS), Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale (DVPRS), and narcotic dose. The choice of the robotic system depended on the surgeon's preference and availability of a specific robotic platform. RESULTS: A total of 10 SP RAPs and 12 MP RAPs were identified. SP RAP patients were significantly younger [23 years (20-34)] than MP RAP [42 years (35.5-47.5), p < 0.01]. No difference in terms of OT (p = 0.6), LOS (p = 0.1), DVPRS (p = 0.2) and narcotic dose (p = 0.1) between the two groups was observed. CONCLUSIONS: SP RAP can be implemented without compromising surgical outcomes and potentially offering some clinical advantages.

Implementation of single-port robotic urologic surgery: experience at a large academic center.

The Single-Port (SP) robotic system is increasingly being implemented in the United States, allowing for several minimally invasive urologic procedures to be performed. The present study aims to describe our single-center experience since the adoption of the SP platform. We retrospectively collected and analyzed consecutive SP cases performed at a major teaching hospital in the Midwest (Rush University Medical Center) from December 2020 to December 2023. Demographic variables were collected. Surgical and pathological outcomes were analyzed in the overall cohort and for each type of procedure. The study timeframe was divided into two periods to assess the evolution of SP technical features over time. In total, 160 procedures were performed, with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) being the most common (49.4%). Overall, 54.4% of the procedures were extraperitoneal, with a significantly higher adoption of this approach in the second half of the study period (30% vs 74.3%, p < 0.001). A "plus one" assistant port was adopted in 38.1% of cases, with a shift towards a "pure" single-port surgery in the most recent procedures (21.1% vs 76.7%, p < 0.001). The median LOS was 33.5 h (30-48), with a rate of any grade and CD ≥ 3 postoperative complications of 9.4% and 2.5%, respectively, and a 30-day readmission rate of 1.9%. SP robotic surgery can be safely and effectively implemented for various urologic procedures. With increasing experience, the SP platform allows shifting away from transperitoneal procedures, potentially minimizing postoperative pain, and shortening hospital stay and postoperative recovery.

Single-port robot-assisted simple prostatectomy: techniques and outcomes.

PURPOSE: To describe the surgical techniques and to analyse the outcomes of single-port robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (SP RASP) procedure for the surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: Three databases (PubMed®, Web of Science™, and Scopus®) were queried to identify studies reporting on the technical aspects and outcomes of SP RASP. Different combinations of keywords were used, according to a free-text protocol, to identify retrospective and prospective studies, both comparative and non-comparative, systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analysis (MA) describing surgical techniques for SP RASP and the associated surgical and functional outcomes. RESULTS: The transvesical approach represents the most common approach for SP RASP. A decrease in terms of estimated blood loss was observed when SP RASP was compared to open simple prostatectomy (OSP) and multi-port (MP) RASP. Furthermore, this technique allowed for a shorter length of hospital stay (LoS) and a lower post-operative complication rate, compared to OSP. Post-operative subjective and objective functional outcomes are satisfying and comparable to OSP and MP RASP. CONCLUSION: SP RASP represents a safe and feasible approach for the surgical management of BPH. It provides comparable surgical and functional outcomes to MP RASP, enabling for minimal invasiveness, enhanced recovery, and potential for improving patient care.

Minimally Invasive Adrenalectomy: A Population-Based Analysis of Contemporary Trends, Outcomes, Costs, and Impact of Social Determinants of Health.

INTRODUCTION: We sought to analyze temporal trends in the utilization of minimally invasive vs open adrenalectomy in the United States; to assess costs, perioperative outcomes, and the determining factors influencing these variables. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of claims data obtained from PearlDiver Mariner, a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant deidentified nationwide database of insurance billing records, was performed. Per-population utilization rates and trends were analyzed using negative binomial regression and trends tests respectively. Continuous and categorical variables were compared using 2-sided t tests and χ2 tests. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify predictors of perioperative complication. RESULTS: A total of 10,753 patients were identified (mean age 53.3 ± 16.1 years). Using the 2011 to 2014 time frame as reference, utilization of adrenalectomy decreased over time (incidence rate ratio for 2015-2018: 0.65 [95% CI 0.62-0.68, P < .001]; incidence rate ratio for 2019-2021: 0.39 [95% CI 0.37-0.41, P < .001]). Minimally invasive adrenalectomies increased significantly over time (P < .001). A greater number of adrenalectomies were performed by general surgeons compared with urologists (70.4% vs 29.5%). Complications were not significantly predicted by any surgical specialty. Significant predictors for complication rates were Charlson comorbidity index > 1 (odds ratio [OR] 1.11, 95% CI 1.09-1.13), presence of social determinants of health (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.18-1.88) and open approach (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.34-1.77). CONCLUSIONS: The number of adrenalectomies in the United States decreased over the past decade, with a shift towards minimally invasive approach. No difference in outcomes for general surgeons vs urologists can be observed. Social determinants of health are independent predictors of increased rate of complications.

Single-port vs multi-port robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: A single center propensity score-matched analysis.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study is to compare key outcomes of Single-Port (SP) and Multi-Port (MP) robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN). METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on our prospectively collected database of patients who underwent SP-RAPN or MP-RAPN at our institution from January 2021 to August 2023. To adjust for potential baseline pre-operative confounders, a 1:1 propensity-score matching analysis (PSMa) was performed. The primary endpoint was to compare perioperative outcomes between the two groups. The secondary endpoint was to compare the achievement of the "Trifecta" outcome (defined as negative surgical margins, absence of high-grade complications and change in eGFR values (ΔeGFR) < 10% at 6 months follow-up) in the matched cohort. RESULTS: After PSMa, 30 SP cases were matched 1:1 to 30 MP cases. In the matched cohort, there were no significant differences between SP and MP approaches in operative time, estimated blood loss, ischemia time, transfusions rate, intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, and positive surgical margin rates. Patients who underwent SP-RAPN had a shorter median length of stay [25 (IQR:24.0-34.5) vs 34 (IQR:30.2-48.0) hours, p < 0.003]. The Trifecta outcome was achieved in 16 (57%) of SP patients and 17 (63%) of MP patients (p = 0.8). CONCLUSIONS: SP-RAPN can be safely implemented in a Center with an established MP-RAPN program. Despite being early in the SP-RAPN experience, key surgical outcomes are not compromised. While offering comparable perioperative and short-term functional outcomes, SP-RAPN can translate into faster recovery and shorter LOS, paving the way for outpatient robotic surgery.

Novel non-MRI imaging techniques for primary diagnosis of prostate cancer: micro-ultrasound, contrast-enhanced ultrasound, elastography, multiparametric ultrasound, and PSMA PET/CT.

BACKGROUND: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) provides enhanced diagnostic accuracy in the detection of prostate cancer, but is not devoid of limitations. Given the recent evolution of non-MRI imaging techniques, this critical review of the literature aimed at summarizing the available evidence on ultrasound-based and nuclear medicine imaging technologies in the initial diagnosis of PCa. METHODS: Three databases (PubMed®, Web of Science™, and Scopus®) were queried for studies examining their diagnostic performance in the primary diagnosis of PCa, weighted against a histological confirmation of PCa diagnosis, using a free-text protocol. Retrospective and prospective studies, both comparative and non-comparative, systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analysis (MA) were included. Based on authors' expert opinion, studies were selected, data extracted, and results qualitatively described. RESULTS: Micro-ultrasound (micro-US) appears as an appealing diagnostic strategy given its high accuracy in detection of PCa, apparently non-inferior to mpMRI. The use of multiparametric US (mpUS) likely gives an advantage in terms of effectiveness coming from the combination of different modalities, especially when certain modalities are combined. Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT may represent a whole-body, one-step approach for appropriate diagnosis and staging of PCa. The direct relationship between lesions avidity of radiotracers and histopathologic and prognostic features, and its valid diagnostic performance represents appealing characteristics. However, intrinsic limits of each of these techniques exist and further research is needed before definitively considering them reliable tools for accurate PCa diagnosis. Other novel technologies, such as elastography and multiparametric US, currently relies on a limited number of studies, and therefore evidence about them remains preliminary. CONCLUSION: Evidence on the role of non-MRI imaging options in the primary diagnosis of PCa is steadily building up. This testifies a growing interest towards novel technologies that might allow overcoming some of the limitations of current gold standard MRI imaging.

Single Port Robotic Pyeloplasty: early single-center experience

ABSTRACT Purpose: Ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) is a prevalent cause of hydronephrosis, especially in young patients. The treatment paradigm for this condition has shifted from open to minimally invasive pyeloplasty. In the present study we describe our initial single centre experience with single port (SP) robot-assisted pyeloplasty (RAP) via periumbilical incision. Material and methods: With the patient in a 60-degree left flank position, the SP system is docked with the Access port (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, US) placed in a periumbilical 3 cm incision. Robotic instruments are deployed as follows: camera at 12 o'clock, bipolar grasper at 9 o'clock, scissors at 3 o'clock and Cadiere at 6 o'clock. After isolation and identification of the ureter and the ureteropelvic junction (UPJ), the ureter is transected at this level and then spatulated. Anastomosis is carried out by two hemicontinuous running sutures, over a JJ stent. Results: Between 2021 and 2023, a total of 8 SP RAP have been performed at our institution, with a median (interquartile range, IQR) of 23 years (20.5-36.5). Intraoperative outcomes showed a median (IQR) OT of 210.5 minutes (190-240.5) and a median (IQR) estimated blood loss (EBL) of 50 mL (22.5-50). No postoperative complications were encountered, with a median (IQR) length of stay (LOS) of 31 hours (28.5-34). Conclusion: In the present study we evaluated the feasibility and safety of SP RAP. The observed outcomes and potential benefits, combined with the adaptability of the SP platform, hold promising implications for the application of SP system in pyeloplasty treatment.

Single Port Robotic Pyeloplasty: early single-center experience.

PURPOSE: Ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) is a prevalent cause of hydronephrosis, especially in young patients. The treatment paradigm for this condition has shifted from open to minimally invasive pyeloplasty. In the present study we describe our initial single centre experience with single port (SP) robot-assisted pyeloplasty (RAP) via periumbilical incision. MATERIAL AND METHODS: With the patient in a 60-degree left flank position, the SP system is docked with the Access port (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, US) placed in a periumbilical 3 cm incision. Robotic instruments are deployed as follows: camera at 12 o'clock, bipolar grasper at 9 o'clock, scissors at 3 o'clock and Cadiere at 6 o'clock. After isolation and identification of the ureter and the ureteropelvic junction (UPJ), the ureter is transected at this level and then spatulated. Anastomosis is carried out by two hemicontinuous running sutures, over a JJ stent. RESULTS: Between 2021 and 2023, a total of 8 SP RAP have been performed at our institution, with a median (interquartile range, IQR) of 23 years (20.5-36.5). Intraoperative outcomes showed a median (IQR) OT of 210.5 minutes (190-240.5) and a median (IQR) estimated blood loss (EBL) of 50 mL (22.5-50). No postoperative complications were encountered, with a median (IQR) length of stay (LOS) of 31 hours (28.5-34). CONCLUSION: In the present study we evaluated the feasibility and safety of SP RAP. The observed outcomes and potential benefits, combined with the adaptability of the SP platform, hold promising implications for the application of SP system in pyeloplasty treatment.

Oncologic outcomes following radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a literature review.

Background and Objective: Radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) represents the gold standard treatment for non-metastatic upper tract urothelial cancer. We sought to provide a comprehensive review of reported oncologic outcomes of the RNU procedure and of factors that might impact these outcomes. Methods: A non-systematic review of the literature was conducted by performing an electronic literature search using PubMed with "radical nephroureterectomy" and "oncologic outcomes" as free text search terms. Both original articles and systematic reviews were considered. Search was limited to articles in English that were published in the last 20 years. Key Content and Findings: Open and laparoscopic RNU offer comparable oncologic outcomes. In more recent years, the discussion has de facto shifted towards the "oncological safety" of robotic RNU, which also seems to offer comparable oncologic outcomes. Several studies have looked at the impact of different treatment-, patient- and tumor-related factors. Among treatment-related factors, attention has been given to diagnostic ureteroscopy and the risk of intravesical recurrence. Surgical wait time and perioperative blood transfusion have also been studied. Perioperative chemotherapy, specifically adjuvant therapy, was shown to improve survival. Among patient-related factors, baseline chronic kidney disease, diabetes mellitus, body mass index, and systemic inflammation have gained recent attention. Some tumor related factors, such as stage, grade, location, and multifocality may negatively impact survival outcomes. Lymphovascular invasion and histologic variants are clinically significant pathological findings. Conclusions: RNU is a procedure with measured long-term oncologic outcomes. Minimally invasive techniques have gained an established role as they seem to offer comparable oncologic "safety", although special attention is needed in relation to the method of bladder cuff excision. Robotic RNU is gaining popularity, and while evidence remains limited, the current literature supports the oncologic safety of this procedure. Several factors, which can be categorized as treatment-related, patient-related, and tumor-related, might impact the oncologic outcomes of UTUC patients undergoing RNU. These factors can provide crucial information to stratify patients based on their relative risk of disease recurrence and mortality which may guide clinical decision-making.

Metastasis-directed treatment in kidney cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide a critical overview of the latest evidence on the role of metastasis-direct treatment (MDT) in the management of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). RECENT FINDINGS: This is a nonsystematic review of the English language literature published since January 2021. A PubMed/MEDLINE search using various search terms was conducted, including only original studies. After title and abstract screening, selected articles were grouped into two main areas which mirror the main treatment options in this setting: surgical metastasectomy (MS) and stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT). While a limited number of retrospective studies have been reported on surgical MS, the consensus of these reports is that extirpation of metastasis should be part of a multimodal management strategy for carefully selected cases. In contrast, there have been both retrospective studies and a small number of prospective studies on the use of SRT of metastatic sites. SUMMARY: As the management of mRCC rapidly evolves, and evidence on MDT - both in the form of MS and SRT - has continued to build over the past 2 years. Overall, there is growing interest in this therapeutic option, which is increasingly being implemented and seems to be safe and potentially beneficial in well selected disease scenarios.

Single-Port Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Where Do We Stand?

In 2018, the da Vinci Single Port (SP) robotic system was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for urologic procedures. Available studies for the application of SP to prostate cancer surgery are limited. The aim of our study is to summarize the current evidence on the techniques and outcomes of SP robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARLP) procedures. A narrative review of the literature was performed in January 2023. Preliminary results suggest that SP-RALP is safe and feasible, and it can offer comparable outcomes to the standard multiport RALP. Extraperitoneal and transvesical SP-RALP appear to be the two most promising approaches, as they offer decreased invasiveness, potentially shorter length of stay, and better pain control. Long-term, high-quality data are missing and further validation with prospective studies across different sites is required.

Multi-institutional analysis of clinical and imaging risk factors for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in men with PI-RADS 3 lesions.

BACKGROUND: Most Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 3 lesions do not contain clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa; grade group ≥2). This study was aimed at identifying clinical and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-derived risk fac- tors that predict CSPCa in men with PI-RADS 3 lesions. METHODS: This study analyzed the detection of CSPCa in men who underwent MRI-targeted biopsy for PI-RADS 3 lesions. Multivariable logistic regression models with goodness-of-fit testing were used to identify variables associated with CSPCa. Receiver operating curves and decision curve analyses were used to estimate the clinical utility of a predictive model. RESULTS: Of the 1784 men reviewed, 1537 were included in the training cohort, and 247 were included in the validation cohort. The 309 men with CSPCa (17.3%) were older, had a higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density, and had a greater likelihood of an anteriorly located lesion than men without CSPCa (p < .01). Multivariable analysis revealed that PSA density (odds ratio [OR], 1.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.85; p < .01), age (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.07; p < .01), and a biopsy-naive status (OR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.38-2.44) were independently associated with CSPCa. A prior negative biopsy was negatively associated (OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.24-0.50; p < .01). The application of the model to the validation cohort resulted in an area under the curve of 0.78. A predicted risk threshold of 12% could have prevented 25% of biopsies while detecting almost 95% of CSPCas with a sensitivity of 94% and a specificity of 34%. CONCLUSIONS: For PI-RADS 3 lesions, an elevated PSA density, older age, and a biopsy-naive status were associated with CSPCa, whereas a prior negative biopsy was negatively associated. A predictive model could prevent PI-RADS 3 biopsies while missing few CSPCas. LAY SUMMARY: Among men with an equivocal lesion (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System 3) on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), those who are older, those who have a higher prostate-specific antigen density, and those who have never had a biopsy before are at higher risk for having clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa) on subsequent biopsy. However, men with at least one negative biopsy have a lower risk of CSPCa. A new predictive model can greatly reduce the need to biopsy equivocal lesions noted on mpMRI while missing only a few cases of CSPCa.

Enzalutamide Monotherapy vs Active Surveillance in Patients With Low-risk or Intermediate-risk Localized Prostate Cancer: The ENACT Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: There are few published studies prospectively assessing pharmacological interventions that may delay prostate cancer progression in patients undergoing active surveillance (AS). Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of enzalutamide monotherapy plus AS vs AS alone in patients with low-risk or intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: The ENACT study was a phase 2, open-label, randomized clinical trial conducted from June 2016 to August 2020 at 66 US and Canadian sites. Eligible patients were 18 years or older, had received a diagnosis of histologically proven low-risk or intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer within 6 months of screening, and were undergoing AS. Patients were monitored during 1 year of treatment and up to 2 years of follow-up. Data analysis was conducted in February 2021. Interventions: Randomized 1:1 to enzalutamide, 160 mg, monotherapy for 1 year or continued AS, as stratified by cancer risk and follow-up biopsy type. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was time to pathological or therapeutic prostate cancer progression (pathological, ≥1 increase in primary or secondary Gleason pattern or ≥15% increased cancer-positive cores; therapeutic, earliest occurrence of primary therapy for prostate cancer). Secondary end points included incidence of a negative biopsy result, percentage of cancer-positive cores, and incidence of a secondary rise in serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels at 1 and 2 years, as well as time to PSA progression. Adverse events were monitored to assess safety. Results: A total of 114 patients were randomized to treatment with enzalutamide plus AS and 113 to AS alone; baseline characteristics were similar between treatment arms (mean [SD] age, 66.1 [7.8] years; 1 Asian individual [0.4%], 21 Black or African American individuals [9.3%], 1 Hispanic individual [0.4%], and 204 White individuals [89.9%]). Enzalutamide significantly reduced the risk of prostate cancer progression by 46% vs AS (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.33-0.89; P = .02). Compared with AS, odds of a negative biopsy result were 3.5 times higher; there was a significant reduction in the percentage of cancer-positive cores and the odds of a secondary rise in serum PSA levels at 1 year with treatment with enzalutamide; no significant difference was observed at 2 years. Treatment with enzalutamide also significantly delayed PSA progression by 6 months vs AS (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53-0.97; P = .03). The most commonly reported adverse events during enzalutamide treatment were fatigue (62 [55.4%]) and gynecomastia (41 [36.6%]). Three patients in the enzalutamide arm died; none were receiving the study drug at the time of death. No deaths were considered treatment-related. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this randomized clinical trial suggest that enzalutamide monotherapy was well-tolerated and demonstrated a significant treatment response in patients with low-risk or intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer. Enzalutamide may provide an alternative treatment option for patients undergoing AS. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02799745.

Assessing the diagnostic performance of systematic freehand PrecisionPoint transperineal prostate biopsy: Comparison of observed outcomes to PBCG nomogram predictions.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the diagnostic performance of freehand systematic transperineal biopsy (fTPb) by using the Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group (PBCG) nomogram, which is a contemporary update to the PCPT nomogram. METHODS: From 1/2012 to 12/2018, fTPb was performed on consecutive men with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer. Patients included in this study had no previous diagnosis of prostate cancer, PSA between 2.5 ng/ml and 20 ng/ml, and underwent at least 12 core biopsies. In addition, those men who underwent pre-biopsy multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate were considered separately from those without prebiopsy imaging. Biopsies were performed by a single urologist who developed the needle guidance device used in the procedure. Clinical and pathological data were collected retrospectively. We compared observed biopsy outcomes with those predicted by PBCG nomogram utilizing chi-square statistical analysis. RESULTS: Systematic fTPb (without pre-biopsy MRI) was performed in 301 men (median age 67, mean PSA 6.9 ng/mL). These men had a median of 20 biopsy cores. Clinically significant cancer (ISUP 2 or greater) was found in 33.9% of men. In men without pre-biopsy MRI, using PBCG Nomogram, we found no significant difference between the expected and observed number of clinically significant cancer (96 vs. 102; P = 0.09). An additional 73 men (median age 67, mean PSA 7.8 ng/ml) underwent pre-biopsy MRI imaging. The addition of MRI targets to systematic sampling resulted in a median of 25 cores. Clinically significant cancer was found in 49.3%. Using the PBCG Nomogram, in the men with pre-biopsy MRI we found clinically significant cancer in significantly more men than was expected by PBCG nomogram predictions (36 vs. 20; P = <0.01). There were no biopsy-related infectious complications. CONCLUSION: The fTPb technique is a promising method to sample the prostate which provides cancer detection that is comparable to that expected from systematic TRUS biopsy. We found that pre-biopsy mpMRI resulted in greater than expected detection of clinically significant cancer when utilizing this technique.

Outcomes of freehand transperineal prostate biopsy with omission of antibiotic prophylaxis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the utility of antimicrobial prophylaxis when performing freehand systematic transperineal (TP) biopsy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 2012 to February 2020, freehand TP prostate biopsy via angiocatheters or the PrecisionPoint Transperineal Access System was performed on consecutive men with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa) or confirmed PCa. Biopsies were performed by a single urologist (developer of the PrecisionPoint system). Clinical data were collected retrospectively. Pre-procedural antibiotics were given to all patients up until 6 September 2016. After this date, antibiotics were omitted from those without risk factors (chronic catherization, concurrent endoscopic procedure, history of sepsis after transrectal [TR] biopsy, history of TR biopsy within the last year, prosthetic joints/heart valves). Patients were assessed 1 week after biopsy for symptoms, emergency department visits, and hospital admissions. Patients who received antimicrobial prophylaxis were compared with those who did not, and infectious complications were analysed. Additionally, oncological outcomes were reported. RESULTS: A total of 988 biopsies (median prostate-specific antigen level 7.7 ng/mL) were included in the analysis on 756 patients. Prophylaxis was given in 538 of the biopsies (54.4%) and in 450 (48.6%) it was not. There was a statistical difference in median age (67 vs 69 years; P < 0.001), abnormal digital rectal examination (13% vs 5%; P < 0.001), and history of multiparametic magnetic resonance imaging (15% vs 31%; P < 0.001) between the prophylaxis and no-prophylaxis cohorts, respectively. There were no documented complications in those who received antibiotics. Within the no-prophylaxis cohort, there were three (0.66%) complications (P = 0.09). Two patients (0.44%) had urinary tract infections and one patient (0.22%) experienced post-procedural urinary retention. No patient required hospital admission or an emergency department visit. Clinically significant cancer was detected in 152 (40.0%) and 64 patients (39.0%) on initial biopsy and prior negative biopsy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that antimicrobial prophylaxis may be safely omitted in selected patients when using the freehand TP approach.

Moving away from systematic biopsies: image-guided prostate biopsy (in-bore biopsy, cognitive fusion biopsy, MRUS fusion biopsy) -literature review.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the detection rate of clinically significant cancer (CSCa) by magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) with that by standard systematic biopsy (SB) and to evaluate the role of MRI-TB as a replacement from SB in men at clinical risk of prostate cancer. METHODS: The non-systematic literature was searched for peer-reviewed English-language articles using PubMed, including the prospective paired studies, where the index test was MRI-TB and the comparator text was SB. Also the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are included if one arm was MRI-TB and another arm was SB. RESULTS: Eighteen prospective studies used both MRI-TB and TRUS-SB, and eight RCT received one of the tests for prostate cancer detection. In most prospective trials to compare MRI-TB vs. SB, there was no significant difference in any cancer detection rate; however, MRI-TB detected more men with CSCa and fewer men with CISCa than SB. CONCLUSION: MRI-TB is superior to SB in detection of CSCa. Since some significant cancer was detected by SB only, a combination of SB with the TB technique would avoid the underdiagnosis of CSCa.

A Case Series of Delayed Proximal Ureteral Strictures After Nephron-Sparing Treatment of Renal Masses.

Background: Delayed proximal ureteral stricture (DPUS) after nephron-sparing treatment (partial nephrectomy [PN] and image-guided percutaneous ablation) of renal masses is a rare complication that occurs because of an unrecognized injury to the proximal ureter and/or its associated vascular supply. We present a multi-institutional series of patients who developed DPUS after nephron-sparing treatment and review relevant tumor characteristics, timing of DPUS presentation, presenting symptoms, and outcome of stricture management. Case Presentation: Between 2000 and 2019, nine patients (five PN and four ablation) were found to have DPUS diagnosed at an average of 9 (6-119) months after PN and 5.5 (1-6) after ablation. Average tumor size was 4.5 (2.9-7.3) cm and 3.6 (3-4.1) cm for those treated with PN and ablation, respectively. Nephrometry score was 8.3 (6-11) and 6.5 (5-8), respectively. For resected tumors, all were located in the lower pole, but uniformity was not found as far as medial vs lateral (3 vs 2), anterior vs posterior (2 vs 2, 1 N/A), and right vs left (3 vs 2). For ablated tumors, all four tumors were right sided, anterior, medial, and lower pole. Initial signs and symptoms include sepsis (2), flank pain (5), and asymptomatic hydronephrosis (2). Concomitant urinoma (2) and retroperitoneal abscess (1) was found on imaging. Initial management included ureteral stenting (5) and percutaneous nephrostomy tube (4). Three underwent nephrectomy. Two had spontaneous resolution of DPUS after a course of ureteral stenting. Conclusion: Potential risk factors associated with DPUS after nephron-sparing treatment, including medial and lower pole tumors, and particularly right-sided anterior masses for ablation and higher complexity nephrometry score for PN. Recognition of delayed symptoms and imaging abnormalities in the surveillance period should cue clinical suspicion to DPUS.