Search

Purpose: The aim of our study was to investigate the impact of the time interval between prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy (RP) on postoperative urinary continence (UC)/erectile function (EF). From a clinical point of view, an interval of several weeks seems to facilitate surgical preparation. Materials and methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent RP for localized prostate cancer (PCa) in a tertiary care center between 2011 and 2020. We evaluated the influence of the following variables on UC and EF 1 year after RP: time from biopsy to RP, age, BMI, pathological T-stage, EF and intraoperative nerve sparing (unilateral vs. bilateral). For this purpose, we performed linear regression analyses as well as manual grouping and cluster analyses to identify possible temporal cutoff ranges. The EPIC-26 and the IIEF questionnaires were used for the assessment of UC and EF. Results: We identified 6202 consecutive patients who underwent RP. Neither manual grouping nor cluster analyses showed a significant difference in continence or potency after RP. According to linear regression models, only age was an independent predictor of incontinence (95%-CI 0.006–0.01), and EF before RP (95%-CI 0.22–0.26), age (95%-CI – 0.68 to – 0.5), BMI (95%-CI – 0.66 to – 0.29) and bilateral NS (95%-CI 5.5–2.1) had significant impacts on postoperative EF (all p < 0.001). Conclusion: In the selected patient population, the time interval between prostate biopsy and RP did not seem to have an effect on postoperative functional outcomes (UC and EF). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: We evaluated the prognostic role of pre-salvage prostate-specific membrane antigen–radioguided surgery (PSMA-RGS) serum levels of alkaline phosphatase (AP), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and neuron-specific enolase (NSE). Materials and methods: Patients who consecutively underwent PSMA-RGS for prostate cancer (PCa) oligorecurrence between January 2019 and January 2022 were selected. Biomarkers were assessed one day before surgery. Cox regression and logistic regression models tested the relationship between biochemical recurrence-free survival (BFS), 6- and 12-month biochemical recurrence (BCR), and several independent variables, including biomarkers. Results: 153 consecutive patients were analyzed. In the univariable Cox regression analysis, none of the biomarkers achieved predictor status (AP: hazard ratio [HR] = 1.03, 95% CI 0.99, 1.01; p = 0.19; CEA: HR = 1.73, 95% CI 0.94, 1.21; p = 0.34; LDH: HR = 1.01, 95% CI 1.00, 1.01; p = 0.05; NSE: HR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.98, 1.06; p = 0.39). The only independent predictor of BFS was the number of positive lesions on PSMA PET (HR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.02, 1.30; p = 0.03). The number of positive lesions was confirmed as independent predictor for BCR within 6 and 12 months (BCR < 6 months: odds ratio [OR] = 1.1, 95% CI 1.0, 1.3; p = 0.04; BCR < 12 months: OR = 1.1, 95% CI 1.0, 1.3; p = 0.04). Conclusion: The assessment of AP, CEA, LDH, and NSE before salvage PSMA-RGS showed no prognostic impact. Further studies are needed to identify possible predictors that will optimize patient selection for salvage PSMA-RGS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Prostate cancer (PCa) detection is usually achieved by PSA measurement and, if indicated, further diagnostics. The recent EAU guidelines recommend a first PSA test at the age of 50 years, if no family history of PCa or BRCA2 mutation exists. However, some men might harbor significant PCa at younger age; thus we evaluated the histopathological results of men treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) in their 40 s at our institution. Materials and methods: We relied on the data of all patients who underwent RP in our institution between 1992 and 2020 and were younger than 50 years at the time of surgery. The histopathological results are descriptively presented. Moreover, we tested the effect of a positive family history on the descriptive results. Results: Overall, 1225 patients younger than 50 years underwent RP at our institution. Median age was 47 years. Most patients showed favorable histopathological characteristics. However, 20% of patients had extraprostatic disease (≥ pT3a), 15% had ISUP Gleason grade group ≥ 3, and 7% had positive lymph nodes (pN1). Patients with a known positive family history did not have a higher rate of adverse disease as their counterparts with a negative family history. Discussion: Our data show that the majority of patients who were diagnosed with PCa at a very young age had favorable histopathological RP characteristics. However, a non-negligible proportion of patients already showed locally advanced disease and would have probably benefited from earlier PCa detection. This should be kept in mind when PCa screening recommendations are proposed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To verify the reliability of HistoScanning™-based, true targeting (TT)-derived prostate biopsy. Methods: We relied on 40 patients suspicious for prostate cancer who underwent standard and TT-derived prostate biopsy. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and the area under the curve (AUC) were assessed for the prediction of biopsy results per octant by HistoScanning™, using different HistoScanning™ signal volume cutoffs (>0, >0.2 and >0.5 ml). Results: Overall, 319 octants were analyzed. Of those, 64 (20.1 %) harbored prostate cancer. According to different HistoScanning™ signal volume cutoffs (>0, >0.2 and >0.5 ml), the AUCs for predicting biopsy results were: 0.51, 0.51 and 0.53, respectively. Similarly, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive and negative predictive values were: 20.7, 78.2, 17.4 and 81.6 %; 20.7, 82.0, 20.3 and 82.3 %; and 12.1, 94.6, 33.3 and 82.9 %, respectively. Conclusions: Prediction of biopsy results based on HistoScanning™ signals and TT-derived biopsies was unreliable. Moreover, the AUC of TT-derived biopsies was low and did not improve when additional signal volume cutoffs were applied (>0.2 and >0.5 ml). We cannot recommend a variation of well-established biopsy standards or reduction in biopsy cores based on HistoScanning™ signals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]