Outcomes Post Beyond Total Mesorectal Excision Plane Resections Following Setting up Complex Colorectal Cancer Service in a District General Hospital.

Background: This study aims to validate the feasibility of a hub-and-spoke model for pelvic exenteration (PE) surgery while upholding favorable patient outcomes. Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing PE at our trust October 2017 and December 2023 was conducted. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis were employed. Results: Sixty-seven patients underwent PE during the study period, mainly for locally advanced colorectal cancer (n=61, 91.04%). Minimally invasive surgery was performed in 16 cases (Robotic 3, 4.47% / Laparoscopic 13, 19.40) while the rest of patients 51 had open surgery (75.11%). Median hospital stay was 12 days (range:8-20). While 24 patients (35.82%) developed major complications (CD III-IV) post-surgery, there were no mortalities associated with pelvic exenteration in this study. Of the 67 patients undergoing surgery with curative intent, negative margins (R0 resection) were achieved in 57 patients (85.12%). This is comparable to outcomes reported by the PelvEx collaborative (85.07% versus 79.8%). At a median follow-up of 22 months, 15 patient (22.38%) recurred with 10.44% local recurrence rate. The 2 years overall and disease-free survival were 85.31% and 77.0.36%, respectively. Conclusion: Our study suggests that a nascent PE service, supported by specialist expertise and resources, can achieve good surgical outcomes within a district general hospital.

Timing of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy (RADICALS-RT): a randomised, controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal timing of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer is uncertain. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of adjuvant radiotherapy versus an observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) biochemical progression. METHODS: We did a randomised controlled trial enrolling patients with at least one risk factor (pathological T-stage 3 or 4, Gleason score of 7-10, positive margins, or preoperative PSA ≥10 ng/mL) for biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy (RADICALS-RT). The study took place in trial-accredited centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to adjuvant radiotherapy or an observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for PSA biochemical progression (PSA ≥0·1 ng/mL or three consecutive rises). Masking was not deemed feasible. Stratification factors were Gleason score, margin status, planned radiotherapy schedule (52·5 Gy in 20 fractions or 66 Gy in 33 fractions), and centre. The primary outcome measure was freedom from distant metastases, designed with 80% power to detect an improvement from 90% with salvage radiotherapy (control) to 95% at 10 years with adjuvant radiotherapy. We report on biochemical progression-free survival, freedom from non-protocol hormone therapy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes. Standard survival analysis methods were used. A hazard ratio (HR) of less than 1 favoured adjuvant radiotherapy. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047. FINDINGS: Between Nov 22, 2007, and Dec 30, 2016, 1396 patients were randomly assigned, 699 (50%) to salvage radiotherapy and 697 (50%) to adjuvant radiotherapy. Allocated groups were balanced with a median age of 65 years (IQR 60-68). Median follow-up was 4·9 years (IQR 3·0-6·1). 649 (93%) of 697 participants in the adjuvant radiotherapy group reported radiotherapy within 6 months; 228 (33%) of 699 in the salvage radiotherapy group reported radiotherapy within 8 years after randomisation. With 169 events, 5-year biochemical progression-free survival was 85% for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group and 88% for those in the salvage radiotherapy group (HR 1·10, 95% CI 0·81-1·49; p=0·56). Freedom from non-protocol hormone therapy at 5 years was 93% for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group versus 92% for those in the salvage radiotherapy group (HR 0·88, 95% CI 0·58-1·33; p=0·53). Self-reported urinary incontinence was worse at 1 year for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group (mean score 4·8 vs 4·0; p=0·0023). Grade 3-4 urethral stricture within 2 years was reported in 6% of individuals in the adjuvant radiotherapy group versus 4% in the salvage radiotherapy group (p=0·020). INTERPRETATION: These initial results do not support routine administration of adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Adjuvant radiotherapy increases the risk of urinary morbidity. An observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for PSA biochemical progression should be the current standard after radical prostatectomy. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, MRC Clinical Trials Unit, and Canadian Cancer Society.

Incidental urinary tract pathologies in the one-stop prostate cancer clinic.

OBJECTIVE: We determined the prevalence of incidental urinary tract pathologies in patients referred to the one-stop suspected prostate cancer clinic and assessed the evaluation and outcome of these pathologies. METHODS: One hundred and ninety patients were referred to the one-stop suspected prostate cancer clinic over a 6-month period. The records of patients with incidental urinary tract pathologies were retrospectively reviewed for demographic characteristics, mode of clinical presentation, further investigations performed, the final diagnosis and the treatment given. RESULTS: Incidental urinary tract pathologies were detected in 12 patients (6.3%). Clinically significant pathologies were found in 4.7% patients (n = 9). Significant incidental findings included bladder cancers (n = 8) and renal cell carcinoma (n = 1). All of these patients had additional diagnostic investigations, required in-patient surgical treatment and have remained disease free at follow up. Trans-rectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsies were only performed in three cases and a diagnosis of prostate cancer was only made in one patient. CONCLUSION: Incidental urinary tract pathologies among patients referred to the one-stop suspected prostate cancer clinic are common. This reflects the need for further investigating patients with lower urinary tract symptoms whenever necessary so avoid missing significant pathologies.

Percutaneous needle biopsy for indeterminate renal masses: a national survey of UK consultant urologists.

BACKGROUND: The use of percutaneous needle biopsy in the evaluation of indeterminate renal masses is controversial and its role in management remains largely unclear. We set to establish current practice on this issue in UK urology departments. METHODS: We conducted a national questionnaire survey of all consultant urologists in the UK, to establish current practice and attitudes towards percutaneous needle biopsy in the management of indeterminate renal masses. RESULTS: 139 (43%) consultant urologists never use biopsy, whereas 111 (34%) always employ it for the diagnosis of indeterminate renal masses. 75 (23%) urologists use biopsy only for a selected patient group. Mass in a solitary kidney, bilateral renal masses and a past history of non-renal cancer were the main indications for use of percutaneous biopsy. The risk of false negative results and biopsy not changing the eventual management of their patients were the commonest reasons not to perform biopsy. CONCLUSION: There is a wide and varied practice amongst UK Consultant Urologists in the use of percutaneous biopsy as part of the management of indeterminate renal masses. The majority of urologists believe biopsy confers no benefit. However there is a need to clarify this issue in the wake of recent published evidence as biopsy results may provide critical information for patients with renal masses in a significant majority. It not only differentiates benign from malignant tissue but can also help in deciding the management option for patients undergoing minimally invasive treatments.

ProstaScint and its role in the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Cancer of the prostate is the most common cancer in males accounting for 33% of newly diagnosed cases. It is the second leading cause of cancer death in American males. The prevalence of prostate cancer increases most rapidly with age and the incidence (unlike other cancers) continues to rise with advancing age. Death due to this cancer is almost invariably the result of failure to control metastatic disease. In addition, several studies have demonstrated that over 30% of patients will experience biochemical recurrence after surgery with long-term (more than 10 years) follow-up. Information regarding the location of the cancer is critical to the success of initial therapy when deciding between local versus systemic treatment options in the newly diagnosed patient. For patients who have already undergone definitive treatment, the localization of recurrent tumor, evidenced by an elevation of prostate-specific antigen, is difficult unless the tumor burden is large enough to be detected on conventional radiographic studies or digital rectal examination and prostatic fossa biopsy. ProstaScint is a diagnostic tool used to detect metastatic prostate cancer in lymph nodes or other sites. This article provides an overview on the uses of ProstaScint in the assessment of patients with recurrent or metastatic prostate cancer.

Giant nonfunctioning carcinoma of the adrenal cortex mimicking renal cell carcinoma: a diagnostic dilemma.

Adrenocortical carcinoma is a rare, highly malignant neoplasm that originates in the adrenal cortex and is difficult to differentiate from renal cell carcinoma, especially if it is gigantic and nonfunctional. We report the case of a 40-year-old man with an incidental mass in the right upper abdomen. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed that the mass originated from the right kidney and was highly suggestive of renal cell carcinoma. However, histologic examination after radical nephrectomy confirmed the mass to be an adrenocortical carcinoma compressing the kidney. We discuss the obscurity and implications of such a diagnosis.

Endo-urological techniques in the management of stent complications in the renal transplant patient.

Complications following renal allograft transplantation have been well documented and, despite improvements in technique, continue to cause significant morbidity and mortality. The placement of indwelling ureteric stents is becoming more common both during primary neo-ureterocystostomy and in the management of subsequent ureteric complications. We present two cases of stent encrustation and urolithiasis treated by a combined percutaneous and flexible ureterorenoscopic approach. These cases illustrate the problems of stents in renal transplant patients and offer endo-urological solutions. It is imperative that stents are correctly placed in these patients and that appropriate plans are made for their removal or exchange.