Search

Aims Ablative therapy, such as focal therapy, cryotherapy or electroporation, aims to treat clinically significant prostate cancer with reduced treatment-related toxicity. Up to a third of patients may require further local salvage treatment after ablative therapy failure. Limited descriptive, but no comparative, evidence exists between different salvage treatment outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare oncological and functional outcomes after salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SRARP) and salvage radiotherapy (SRT). Materials and methods Data were collected prospectively and retrospectively on 100 consecutive SRARP cases and 100 consecutive SRT cases after ablative therapy failure in a high-volume tertiary centre. Results High-risk patients were over-represented in the SRARP group (66.0%) compared with the SRT group (48.0%) (P = 0.013). The median (interquartile range) follow-up after SRARP was 16.5 (10.0–30.0) months and 37.0 (18.5–64.0) months after SRT. SRT appeared to confer greater biochemical recurrence-free survival at 1, 2 and 3 years compared with SRARP in high-risk patients (year 3: 86.3% versus 66.0%), but biochemical recurrence-free survival was similar for intermediate-risk patients (year 3: 90.0% versus 75.6%). There was no statistical difference in pad-free continence at 12 and 24 months between SRARP (77.2 and 84.7%) and SRT (75.0 and 74.0%) (P = 0.724, 0.114). Erectile function was more likely to be preserved in men who underwent SRT. After SRT, cumulative bowel and urinary Radiation Therapy Oncology Group toxicity grade I were 25.0 and 45.0%, grade II were 11.0 and 11.0% and grade III or IV complications were 4.0 and 5.0%, respectively. Conclusion We report the first comparative analyses of salvage prostatectomy and radiotherapy following ablative therapy. Men with high-risk disease appear to have superior oncological outcomes after SRT; however, treatment allocation does not appear to influence oncological outcomes for men with intermediate-risk disease. Treatment allocation was associated with a different spectrum of toxicity profile. Our data may inform shared decision-making when considering salvage treatment following focal or whole-gland ablative therapy.

Male hypogonadism (MH) is a common endocrine disorder. However, uncertainties and variations in its diagnosis and management exist. There are several current guidelines on testosterone replacement therapy that have been driven predominantly by single disciplines. The Society for Endocrinology commissioned this new guideline to provide all care providers with a multidisciplinary approach to treating patients with MH. This guideline has been compiled using expertise from endocrine (medical and nursing), primary care, clinical biochemistry, urology and reproductive medicine practices. These guidelines also provide a patient perspective to help clinicians best manage MH.

Purpose: Salvage radical prostatectomy is rare due to the risk of postoperative complications. We compare salvage Retzius-sparing robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (SRS-RARP) with salvage standard robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (SS-RARP). Materials and Methods: A total of 72 patients across 9 centers were identified (40 SRS-RARP vs 32 SS-RARP). Demographics, perioperative data, and pathological and functional outcomes were compared using Student's t-test and ANOVA. Cox proportional hazard models and Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed to assess risk of incontinence and time to continence. Linear regression models were constructed to investigate postoperative pad use and console time. Results: Median followup was 23 vs 36 months for SRS-RARP vs SS-RARP. Console time and estimated blood loss favored SRS-RARP. There were no differences in complication rates or oncologic outcomes. SRS-RARP had improved continence (78.4% vs 43.8%, p 0-1 pad (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.10-0.79, p=0.016), although not when defined as >0 pad (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.31-1.01, p=0.053). On adjusted analysis SRS-RARP was associated with decreased pads per day. Lymph node dissection and primary treatment with stereotactic body radiation therapy were associated with longer console time. Conclusions: SRS-RARP is a feasible salvage option with significantly improved urinary function outcomes. This may warrant increased utilization of SRS-RARP to manage men who fail nonsurgical primary treatment for prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer presents a significant challenge and burden for health care centres across the world. In the UK and other parts of Europe, as well as areas of the USA, centralisation of services has been implemented. In the UK and Europe, hospital centres are split into a hub-and-spoke system. High-volume centres carry out treatment as hubs and local hospitals carry out diagnostics and referrals as spokes. In this narrative mini-review we evaluate whether centralisation of services has improved patient outcomes, streamlined the use of resources, and reduced costs. We also discuss the positive and negative impacts of centralisation of prostate cancer services. PATIENT SUMMARY: This mini-review discusses the current use of centralisation of prostate cancer services. We assess the evidence in favour of centralisation as well as the issues it can present to both health care systems and patients.

OBJECTIVES To report toxicity of treatment observed in men participating in the Robotic surgery After Focal Therapy (RAFT) clinical trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS Men were eligible for this prospective single group interventional study if they had histologically confirmed recurrent/residual prostate adenocarcinoma following primary FT. The short-form Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26) measured prior to salvage robotic prostatectomy (S-RARP) and 3-monthly post-operatively together with Clavien-Dindo complications (I-IV). Secondary outcomes included biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCFS) following surgery and need for salvage treatment after surgery. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03011606. RESULTS Twenty-four men were recruited between February 2016 and September 2018. 1 patient withdrew from the trial after consenting and before S-RARP. 23 men completed 12-month post S-RARP follow-up. Median EPIC-26 urinary continence scores initially deteriorated after 3 months (82.4 vs 100) but there was no statistically significant difference from baseline at 12 months (100 vs 100, P = 0.31). Median lower urinary tract symptom scores improved after 12 months compared to baseline (93.8 vs 87.5, P = 0.01). At 12 months, 19/23 (83%) were pad-free and 22/23 (96%) required 0/1 pads. Median sexual function subscale scores deteriorated and remained low at 12 months (22.2 vs 58.3, P < 0.001). Utilising a minimally important difference of nine points, at 12 months after surgery 17/23 (74%) reported urinary continence to be 'better' or 'not different' to pre-operative baseline. The corresponding figure for sexual function (utilising a minimally important difference of 12 points) was 7/23 (30%). There was no statistically significant difference on median bowel/hormonal subscale scores. Only a single patient had a post-operative complication (Clavien-Dindo Grade I). BCFS at 12 months after surgery was 82.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 60.1-93.1%) while 4/23 (17%) received salvage radiation. CONCLUSIONS The RAFT clinical trial suggests toxicity of surgery after FT is low, with good urinary function outcomes, albeit sexual function deteriorated overall. Oncological outcomes at 12 months appear acceptable.

PURPOSE: We compared standard robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in a multicenter study using prospective patient reported outcome measures of functional recovery and quality of life plus standard pentafecta outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patient and physician reported data on 483 patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy from August 2017 to April 2020 by 3 experienced surgeons had been prospectively collected. Perioperative and pentafecta outcomes were analyzed using SPSS software. Patient reported outcome measures for urinary function, erectile function and quality of life were reported at baseline and at 7 days and 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: A total of 201 patients underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and 282 had Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Patient and tumor characteristics were similar except for fewer low risk and more intermediate risk disease in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy vs Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (p

Background Salvage Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (sRARP) has been described as feasible treatment for the management of localised prostate cancer (PCa) recurrence after primary treatment. However, no large reports have published cancer and quality outcomes. Objective To report perioperative, functional and oncologic outcomes of sRARP in patients with localised PCa recurrence. Design, Setting, and Participants We retrospectively evaluated 106 patients with local recurrence eligible for sRARP. Surgical Procedure Surgery was performed using the DaVinci Si system similar to the standard approach but with adaptation to the primary treatment. Measurements Peri-operative outcomes included 90-day complication rate. Functional outcomes included rates of incontinence and erectile dysfunction. Oncological outcomes included tumour staging, margin rate and recurrence. Results and Limitations Primary treatment was High Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) in 59 (56%) patients, 27 (25%) radiotherapy, 10 (9%) seed brachytherapy, 8 (8%) solitary androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), one (1%) cryotherapy and one (1%) electroporation / Nanoknife. Median follow-up was 2.1 years. 90-day complication rate was 8%. At two years or more, 50% were fully continent and 33% were socially continent. Continence rates tended to be better after focal compared to whole-gland treatments. Erectile dysfunction was present in 95%. Positive surgical margin rate was 39%. Biochemical recurrence occurred in 13% and local or metastatic recurrence in 11%. Conclusions sRARP is technically more challenging but is a feasible option in high-volume centres for treatment of recurrent PCa. Patients should be counselled that functional outcomes are inferior to primary RARP. Adjustment of surgical technique according to the primary treatment is key for good surgical outcomes. Patient Summary We report our experience with sRARP for the management of localised PCa recurrence after primary treatment. This represents a feasible approach with acceptable peri-operative complications and cancer outcomes. Functional outcomes are inferior to RARP in the primary setting.

Background The comparative effectiveness of robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) versus open radical cystectomy (ORC) in terms of perioperative outcomes is still a matter of debate affecting payors, physicians, and patients. Objective To evaluate comparative perioperative and longer-term morbidity of RARC versus ORC in a multicenter contemporary retrospective cohort of patients. Design, setting, and participants This retrospective multicenter study included patients with bladder cancer treated with radical cystectomy at 10 academic centers between 2000 and 2017. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Intraoperative outcomes including blood loss and operative time as well as postoperative outcomes including time to discharge, complication, readmission, reoperation, and mortality rates at 30 and 90 d were assessed. Multiple imputation and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were used. IPTW-multivariable-adjusted regression and logistic analyses were performed to evaluate the associations of RARC versus ORC with perioperative outcomes at 30 and 90 d. Results and limitations Overall, 1887 patients (1197 RARC and 690 ORC) were included in the study. After IPTW-adjusted analysis, no differences between the groups in terms of preoperative characteristics were observed. RARC was associated with lower blood loss (p Conclusions While RARC was associated with less blood loss and shorter hospital stay, it also led to longer operation times and more readmissions. There were no differences in 30- and 90-d complications. Because there are no apparent differences in safety between ORC and RARC in expert centers, differences in oncologic and cost-effectiveness outcomes are likely to drive decision making regarding RARC utilization. Patient summary In this study we investigated the differences between RARC and ORC in terms of perioperative outcomes. We found no difference in early and late complications. We concluded that, to date, differences in oncologic and cost-effectiveness outcomes should drive decision making regarding RARC utilization.

OBJECTIVE: Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RSP) is a novel approach for radical prostatectomy that was described by our group for the first time in 2010 and is spreading all around the world. The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of surgical experience (SE) on perioperative, functional and oncological outcomes during the first 50 RSP cases performed by a naive surgeon for this novel approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the initial cases operated by 14 surgeons in 12 different international centers. Pre-, peri- and post- operative features of the first 50 patients operated by each surgeon in all the participating centers were collected. The effect of the SE on perioperative, functional and oncological outcomes was firstly evaluated after stratification of surgical experience in initial (≤25) and expert cases (>25) and after using locally weighted scatter-plot smoother (LOWESS) function to graphically explore the relationship between SE and the outcomes of interest. RESULTS: We evaluated 626 patients. Median follow-up was 13 months in the first group and 9 months in the second (p=0.002). Preoperative features were overlapping between the two groups. Lower console time (140 min vs 120 minutes, p=0.001) and a trend for lower complications rates (13 vs 5.5%, p=0.038) were observed in the second group. The relationship between SE and console time, immediate urinary continence recovery and Clavien Dindo complications ≥2 was linear without reaching a plateau after 50 cases. Conversely, a non-linear relationship was observed between SE and PSMs. CONCLUSIONS: We reported the first multi-center experience of Retzius-sparing RARP during the learning curve. We found that console time, immediate urinary continence recovery and postoperative complications are optimal from the beginning and further quickly improve during the learning process, while PSMs rates did not clearly enhance over the first 50 cases.

Background Partial ablation of the prostate using high-intensity focussed ultrasound (HIFU-PA) is a treatment option for localised prostate cancer. When local recurrence occurs, salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy is a treatment option for selected patients, but there is a paucity of data on the peri-operative safety, functional and oncologic outcomes of sRARP.. The objective of this study was therefore to describe peri-operative safety, functional and early oncologic outcomes following salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (sRARP) for local recurrence after HIFU-PA. Methods Retrospective analysis of a prospective database of 53 consecutive men who underwent sRARP after HIFU-PA from 2012 to 2018. Continence and erectile-function were reported pre-HIFU, pre-sRARP, 3-months post-sRARP and 12-months post-sRARP. Complications, PSMs and need for subsequent ADT/radiotherapy were assessed. Results 45 men were suitable for inclusion and had sufficient data for analyses. Median duration from HIFU to sRARP was 30.0 months and median follow-up post-sRARP was 17.7 months. Median age, PSA and ISUP group were 63.0 yrs., 7.2 ng/mL and 2; 88.9% were cT2. Median operative-console time, blood loss and hospital stay were 140 min, 200 ml and 1 day respectively. Clavien-Dindo grade 1, 2 and 3 complications 90d) complications occurred in 13.2%. At sRARP pathology, ISUP 3–5 occurred in 51.1%, pT3a/b in 64.5%, and PSMs in 44.4% (37.5% for pT2, 48.3% for pT3). Of men with > 3-months follow-up after sRARP, 26.3% underwent adjuvant radiotherapy/ADT for residual disease or adverse pathologic features; 5.3% experienced BCR requiring salvage ADT/radiotherapy. Freedom from ADT/radiotherapy was 66.7% at 12-months. Pad-free rates were 100% pre-HIFU, 95.3% post-HIFU, 29.4% 3-months post-sRARP, and 65.5% 12-months post-sRARP. Median IIEF-5 scores pre-HIFU, post-HIFU, 3- and 12-months post-sRARP were 23.5, 16, 5 and 5, respectively. Potency rates were 81.8, 65.5, 0 and 0%, respectively. Bilateral/unilateral nerve sparing were feasible in 7%/22%. Conclusion Salvage RARP was safe with acceptable but sub-optimal continence and poor sexual-function and poor oncologic outcomes. One in three men required additional treatment within 12-months. This information may aid men and urologists with treatment selection and counselling regarding primary HIFU-PA vs primary RARP and when considering salvage RARP.

To develop a novel Taiwanese prostate cancer (PCa) risk model for predicting PCa, comparing its predictive performance with that of two well-established PCa risk calculator apps. 1545 men undergoing prostate biopsies in a Taiwanese tertiary medical center between 2012 and 2019 were identified retrospectively. A five-fold cross-validated logistic regression risk model was created to calculate the probabilities of PCa and high-grade PCa (Gleason score ≧ 7), to compare those of the Rotterdam and Coral apps. Discrimination was analyzed using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC). Calibration was graphically evaluated with the goodness-of-fit test. Decision-curve analysis was performed for clinical utility. At different risk thresholds to biopsy, the proportion of biopsies saved versus low- and high-grade PCa missed were presented. Overall, 278/1309 (21.2%) patients were diagnosed with PCa, and 181 out of 278 (65.1%) patients had high-grade PCa. Both our model and the Rotterdam app demonstrated better discriminative ability than the Coral app for detection of PCa (AUC: 0.795 vs 0.792 vs 0.697, DeLong’s method: P

Objective To review the ongoing randomised trials of cytoreductive prostatectomy (CRP) in de novo hormone-sensitive metastatic prostate cancer (HSPC) in order to identify their goals and assess their strengths and weaknesses. Methods PubMed, MEDLINE and clinical trials websites searches were performed to identify currently ongoing trials of CRP in de novo HSPC. Results Nine randomised clinical trials in CRP were identified and included: Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) 1802, Surgery in Metastatic Carcinoma of Prostate (SIMCAP), Adjuvant Treatments to the Local Tumour for Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Assessment of Novel Treatment Algorithms (IP2-ATLANTA), Testing Radical prostatectomy in men with prostate cancer and oligoMetastases to the bone (TRoMbone), Impact of Radical Prostatectomy as Primary Treatment in Patients with Prostate Cancer with Limited Bone Metastases (g-RAMPP), Cytoreductive Prostatectomy vs Cytoreductive Prostate Irradiation as a Local Treatment Option for Metastatic Prostate Cancer: a Multicentric Feasibility Trial (LoMP II), Androgen-Deprivation Therapy or Androgen-Deprivation Therapy Plus Definitive Treatment (Radiation or Surgery) (FUSCC-OMPCa), and the Testing Radical Prostatectomy in Chinese Men with Prostate Cancer and oligoMetastases to the Bone study. Each study was different; assessing various primary outcome measures including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival and feasibility to randomise between standard therapy and CRP or between radiation therapy and CRP in the metastatic setting. In the oligometastatic setting, the trials assess OS, feasibility to randomise and time to castration resistance. Similarly, a number of secondary endpoints ranging from cancer-specific outcomes to quality-of-life outcomes are being investigated. The inclusion criteria in these trials also varied in terms of volume of metastatic disease (oligometastatic to high-volume metastatic disease), diagnosis of metastases (imaging based vs biopsy confirmed), imaging modalities used (conventional to newer modalities), as well as outcomes and follow-up regimes. Conclusion While there are differences in each protocol, each trial aims to address different aspects of CRP in de novo HSPC. Therefore, the specific goals of each study and the limitations have to be taken into consideration when interpreting the results of these trials.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE:Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RS-RARP) has been shown to have better immediate functional outcomes, but with similar long-term oncological outcome...

Aim Salvage Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (sRARP) is a potential treatment option for locally recurrent Prostate Cancer after non-surgical primary treatment. There are minimal data comparing outcomes between propensity-matched salvage and primary Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP). We compare perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes of sRARP with primary RARP and between sRARP post-whole and focal gland therapy. Method 1:1 propensity-matched comparison of 146 sRARP with primary RARP from a cohort of 3,852 consecutive patients from a high-volume tertiary centre. Results There were no significant differences in patient characteristics between the salvage and primary RARP groups. Grade III-V Clavien-Dindo complication rates were 1.3% and 0% in the salvage and primary groups, respectively (p = 0.310). Median (IQR) follow-up was 16 (10,30) and 21 (13,33) months in the salvage and primary groups, respectively. BCR rates were 30.8% and 13.7% in the salvage and primary groups, respectively (p Conclusions SRARP has similar perioperative but inferior oncological outcomes to primary RARP. Continence rates are similar to primary RARP, but potency is worse. Perioperative and oncological outcomes of sRARP after focal gland therapy are similar but continence outcomes are superior compared to sRARP after whole gland therapy.

Introduction Routine postoperative blood tests (POBT) are used to evaluate the impact of surgery on pre-existing co-morbidities and to detect early complications. This practice dates back to an era of open surgery, when blood loss and complication rates were higher. We propose new guidelines to improve the specificity of POBT. Method The cases of 1040 consecutive patients who underwent a primary or salvage RARP at two large tertiary urology centres in the United Kingdom were retrospectively reviewed, and new guidelines were designed. The guidelines were prospectively validated in a cohort of 300 patients. Result Derivation Dataset 3% and 5% had intra- and post-operative Clavien-Dindo complications, respectively. 15% had clinical concerns postoperatively. 0.9% required perioperative transfusion. 78% had routine blood tests without clinical concerns, none of whom developed a complication. 98% of complications were suspected by clinical judgement. 6% of patients had a discharge delay of ≥ 1 days due to delayed or incomplete blood tests. Validation Dataset No significant difference existed in complication, clinical concern or transfusion rates between the derivation and validation datasets. New guidelines improved sensitivity for complications from 98% to 100% and specificity from 0% to 74%. The number of blood tests requested reduced by 73% (P Conclusion Postoperative complications and transfusion following RARP are rare. Routine POBT without clinical indication are unnecessary and inefficient. A guideline-based approach to POBT can reduce costs and optimise discharge without compromising patient safety or care. Take-home Message Routine postoperative blood tests following robot assisted radical prostatectomy are often unnecessary. A guideline-based approach can reduce costs and optimise patient care.

We describe the pathological characteristics of recurrence following high intensity focused ultrasound partial ablation in men treated with salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. We assessed the sensitivity of magnetic resonance imaging before salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in these men.A total of 35 men underwent salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy after high intensity focused ultrasound partial ablation from 2012 to 2018. We compared clinicopathological characteristics before ultrasound and before salvage prostatectomy after ultrasound to histopathology on salvage prostatectomy. We assessed infield recurrence, out of field disease, positive surgical margins and magnetic resonance imaging sensitivity before salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.Before high intensity focused ultrasound 55.9% of men had multifocal disease and 47.1% had Gleason 3 + 3 disease outside the treatment field. Median time to salvage prostatectomy was 16 months (IQR 11-26). Indications for salvage prostatectomy were infield recurrence in 55.8% of cases, out of field recurrence in 20.6%, and infield and out of field recurrence in 23.5%. On salvage prostatectomy histopathology revealed significant cancer, defined as ISUP (International Society of Urological Pathology) 2 or greater, infield in 97.1% of cases, out of field in 81.3%, and infield and out of field in 79.4%. Of the cases 82.4% were adversely reclassified at salvage prostatectomy compared to 67.6% before ultrasound. The positive surgical margin rate was 40.0%. Of the positive margins 84.6% were in the region of previous ultrasound despite wide excision, including pT2 in 28.6%, pT3 in 47.6% and size 3 mm or greater, pT3 or multifocal (ie significant) in 31.4%. After ultrasound the sensitivity of magnetic resonance imaging for infield and out of field recurrence was 81.8% and 60.7%, respectively.Salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy may confer a higher risk of positive surgical margins, upgrading and up-staging than primary robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. High intensity focused ultrasound carries a risk of recurrence inside and outside the ablation zone. This information may inform salvage surgical planning and patient counseling regarding the choice of initial therapy and salvage treatment after high intensity focused ultrasound.

Purpose:We hypothesized that 1) introducing prebiopsy multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging would increase the diagnostic yield of transrectal prostate biopsy and 2) this would inform recommen...

Prostate specific antigen (PSA) is one of the best-known biomarkers for screening, diagnosis and follow-up of patients for prostate cancer. Owing to several inherent limitations with PSA, various newer blood and urinary based biomarkers have been evaluated in pursuit of better detection and risk stratification of prostate cancer cases. A combination of these different markers, in adjunct with clinical risk factors, and recent advances in imaging promises to offer better diagnostic performance with clearer risk stratification guiding therapeutics. We carried out an extensive literature search for the different biomarkers available for screening and diagnosis of prostate cancer, compared their performance with serum PSA to allow clinicians to draw meaningful conclusions to offer their patients a more personalized medical care.

Introduction Patients undergoing RARP commonly require routine post-operative blood tests. This practice dates from an era of open surgery, with increased blood loss and complications. We aim to improve specificity of blood test requests with novel guidelines. Method 1039 consecutive RARP patients at two tertiary urology centres in the UK were audited. Novel guidelines constructed based on risk stratified evidence from the initial audit were used to prospectively audit 133 patients. Results 16% had clinical concerns post-operatively. 1% and 4% had an intra- and post-operative complication. Intra- or post-operative clinical judgement flagged post-operative complications in 99.9%. 80% had routine blood tests with no clinical concerns. 6% had delayed discharge due to delayed processing of blood tests. 0.9% received a peri-operative transfusion. Re-Audit Novel guidelines reduced the number of blood tests requested from 100% to 36%. Specificity in diagnosing a complication improved from 0% to 67%. Discharge delays reduced from 6% to 0% and no post-operative complications were missed (sensitivity 100%). Conclusions Routine blood tests, without an indication, did not flag any additional post-operative complications. Blood transfusion is rare for RARP. Novel guidelines to request post-operative blood tests will reduce costs and discharge delays whilst maintaining appropriate patient safety and care.

Background Salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (sRARP) is a potential treatment option for locally recurrent prostate cancer (PCa) after nonsurgical primary treatment. There are minimal data comparing outcomes between propensity-matched sRARP and primary robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Objective The primary objective is to compare perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes of sRARP with primary RARP, and the secondary is to compare outcomes between sRARP after whole and focal gland therapy. Design, setting, and participants A 1:1 propensity-matched comparison was carried out of 135 sRARP cases with primary RARP cases from a cohort of 3852 consecutive patients from a high-volume tertiary centre. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes including complication rates, positive surgical margins, biochemical recurrence (BCR), continence, and erectile dysfunction (ED) were retrospectively collected. Results and limitations There were no significant differences in patient characteristics between sRARP and primary RARP groups. In the salvage and primary groups, median (interquartile range) follow-up periods were 521 (304–951) and 638 (394–951) d, grade III–V Clavien-Dindo complication rates were 1.5% and 0% (p = 0.310), BCR rates were 31.9% and 14.1% (p, Take Home Message We report the largest propensity-matched comparison of salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) with primary RARP. Salvage RARP is a feasible procedure for the treatment of locally recurrent prostate cancer in high-volume centres.

Background Two million non-emergency surgeries are being cancelled globally every week due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which will have a major impact on patients and healthcare systems. Methods During the peak of the pandemic in the United Kingdom, we set up a multicentre cancer network amongst 14 National Health Service institutions, performing urological, thoracic, gynaecological and general surgical urgent and cancer operations at a central COVID-19 cold site. This is a cohort study of 500 consecutive patients undergoing surgery in this network. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality from COVID-19. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality and post-operative complications at 30-days. Results 500 patients underwent surgery with median age 62.5 (IQR 51–71). 65% were male, 60% had a known diagnosis of cancer and 61% of surgeries were considered complex or major. No patient died from COVID-19 at 30-days. 30-day all-cause mortality was 3/500 (1%). 10 (2%) patients were diagnosed with COVID-19, 4 (1%) with confirmed laboratory diagnosis and 6 (1%) with probable COVID-19. 33/500 (7%) of patients developed Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher complications, with 1/33 (3%) occurring in a patient with COVID-19. Conclusion It is safe to continue cancer and urgent surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic with appropriate service reconfiguration., Highlights • Priority surgeries are being cancelled every week due to the COVID-19 pandemic. • A multicentre surgical referral network was set up as part of an NHS England approach to continuing safe surgery • The referral network consisted of 14 NHS trusts and surgery was performed at a single COVID-19 ‘cold site’. • After 500 surgeries performed, there was a 0% 30-day mortality from COVID-19. • It is safe to continue cancer and priority surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic with appropriate service reconfiguration.

Background Mobile health apps have emerged as useful tools for patients and clinicians alike, sharing health information or assisting in clinical decision-making. Prostate cancer (PCa) risk calculator mobile apps have been introduced to assess risks of PCa and high-grade PCa (Gleason score ≥7). The Rotterdam Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator and Coral–Prostate Cancer Nomogram Calculator apps were developed from the 2 most-studied PCa risk calculators, the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and the North American Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) risk calculators, respectively. A systematic review has indicated that the Rotterdam and Coral apps perform best during the prebiopsy stage. However, the epidemiology of PCa varies among different populations, and therefore, the applicability of these apps in a Taiwanese population needs to be evaluated. This study is the first to validate the PCa risk calculator apps with both biopsy and prostatectomy cohorts in Taiwan. Objective The study’s objective is to validate the PCa risk calculator apps using a Taiwanese cohort of patients. Additionally, we aim to utilize postprostatectomy pathology outcomes to assess the accuracy of both apps with regard to high-grade PCa. Methods All male patients who had undergone transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsies in a single Taiwanese tertiary medical center from 2012 to 2018 were identified retrospectively. The probabilities of PCa and high-grade PCa were calculated utilizing the Rotterdam and Coral apps, and compared with biopsy and prostatectomy results. Calibration was graphically evaluated with the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. Discrimination was analyzed utilizing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Decision curve analysis was performed for clinical utility. Results Of 1134 patients, 246 (21.7%) were diagnosed with PCa; of these 246 patients, 155 (63%) had high-grade PCa, according to the biopsy results. After confirmation with prostatectomy pathological outcomes, 47.2% (25/53) of patients were upgraded to high-grade PCa, and 1.2% (1/84) of patients were downgraded to low-grade PCa. Only the Rotterdam app demonstrated good calibration for detecting high-grade PCa in the biopsy cohort. The discriminative ability for both PCa (AUC: 0.779 vs 0.687; DeLong’s method: P Conclusions The Rotterdam and Coral apps can be applied to the Taiwanese cohort with accuracy. The Rotterdam app outperformed the Coral app in the prediction of PCa and high-grade PCa. Despite the small size of the prostatectomy cohort, both apps, to some extent, demonstrated the predictive capacity for true high-grade PCa, confirmed by the whole prostate specimen. Following our external validation, the Rotterdam app might be a good alternative to help detect PCa and high-grade PCa for Taiwanese men.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE:Patients undergoing Robotic Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP) commonly require 2 group and screen samples pre-operatively. However, literature suggests intra-operativ...

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) for prostate cancer (PCa) treatment has been widely adopted with limited evidence for long-term (5 yr) oncologic efficacy.To evaluate long-term oncologic outcomes following RARP.Prospective cohort study of 885 patients who underwent RARP as monotherapy for PCa between 2002 and 2006 in a single European centre and followed up until 2016.RARP as monotherapy.Biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival (BCRFS), salvage therapy (ST)-free survival (STFS), prostate cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and event-time distributions were compared using the log-rank test. Variables predictive of BCR and ST were identified using Cox proportional hazards models.We identified 167 BCRs, 110 STs, 16 PCa-related deaths, and 51 deaths from other/unknown causes. BCRFS, STFS, CSS, and OS rates were 81.8%, 87.5%, 98.5%, and 93.0%, respectively, at median follow-up of 10.5 yr. On multivariable analysis, the strongest independent predictors of both BCR and ST were preoperative Gleason score, pathological T stage, positive surgical margins (PSMs), and preoperative prostate-specific antigen. PSM3mm/multifocal but not ≤3mm independently affected the risk of both BCR and ST. Study limitations include a lack of centralised histopathologic reporting, lymph node and post-operative tumour volume data in a historical cohort, and patient-reported outcomes.RARP appears to confer effective long-term oncologic efficacy. The risk of BCR or ST is unaffected by ≤3mm PSM, but further follow-up is required to determine any impact on CSS.Robot-assisted surgery for prostate cancer is effective 10 yr after treatment. Very small (3mm) amounts of cancer at the cut edge of the prostate do not appear to impact on recurrence risk and the need for additional treatment, but it is not yet known whether this affects the risk of death from prostate cancer.

Background Whether surgeons perform better utilising a robot-assisted laparoscopic technique compared with an open approach during prostate cancer surgery is debatable. Objective To report erectile function and early oncologic outcomes for both surgical modalities, stratified by prostate cancer risk grouping. Design, setting, and participants In a prospective nonrandomised trial, we recruited 2545 men with prostate cancer from seven open ( n =753) and seven robot-assisted ( n =1792) Swedish centres (2008–2011). Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Clinometrically-validated questionnaire-based patient-reported erectile function was collected before, 3 mo, 12 mo, and 24 mo after surgery. Surgeon-reported degree of neurovascular-bundle preservation, pathologist-reported positive surgical margin (PSM) rates, and 2-yr prostate-specific antigen-relapse rates were measured. Results and limitations Among 1702 preoperatively potent men, we found enhanced erectile function recovery for low/intermediate-risk patients in the robot-assisted group at 3 mo. For patients with high-risk tumours, point estimates for erectile function recovery at 24 mo favoured the open surgery group. The degree of neurovascular bundle preservation and erectile function recovery were greater correlated for robot-assisted surgery. In pT2 tumours, 10% versus 17% PSM rates were observed for open and robot-assisted surgery, respectively; corresponding rates for pT3 tumours were 48% and 33%. These differences were associated with biochemical recurrence in pT3 but not pT2 disease. The study is limited by its nonrandomised design and relatively short follow-up. Conclusions Earlier recovery of erectile function in the robot-assisted surgery group in lower-risk patients is counterbalanced by lower PSM rates for open surgeons in organ-confined disease; thus, both open and robotic surgeons need to consider this trade-off when determining the plane of surgical dissection. Robot-assisted surgery also facilitates easier identification of nerve preservation planes during radical prostatectomy as well as wider dissection for pT3 cases. Patient summary For prostate cancer surgery, an open operation reduces erection problems in high-risk cancers but has higher relapse rates than robotic surgery. Relapse rates appear similar in low/intermediate-risk cancers and the robot appears better at preserving erections in these cases.

Purpose: This study sought to test the acceptability and feasibility of a nurse-led psycho-educational intervention (NLPI) delivered in primary care to prostate cancer survivors, and to provide preliminary estimates of the effectiveness of the intervention. Methods: Men who reported an ongoing problem with urinary, bowel, sexual or hormone-related functioning/ vitality on a self-completion questionnaire were invited to participate. Participants were randomly assigned to the NLPI plus usual care, or to usual care alone. Recruitment and retention rates were assessed. Prostate-related quality of life, self-efficacy, unmet needs, and psychological morbidity were measured at baseline and 9 months. Health-care resource use data was also collected. An integrated qualitative study assessed experiences of the intervention. Results: 61% eligible men (83/136) participated in the trial, with an 87% (72/83) completion rate. Interviews indicated that the intervention filled an important gap in care following treatment completion, helping men to self-manage, and improving their sense of well-being. However, only a small reduction in unmet needs and small improvement in self-efficacy was observed, and no difference in prostate-related quality of life or psychological morbidity. Patients receiving the NLPI recorded more primary care visits, while the usual care group recorded more secondary care visits. Most men (70%; (21/30)) felt the optimal time for the intervention was around the time of diagnosis/before the end of treatment. Conclusions: Findings suggest a nurse-led psycho-educational intervention in primary care is feasible, acceptable and potentially useful to prostate cancer survivors.

Background: The high degree of genomic diversity in cancer represents a challenge for identifying objective prognostic markers. We aimed to examine the extent of tumour heterogeneity and its effect on the evaluation of a selected prognostic marker using prostate cancer as a model. Methods: We assessed Gleason Score (GS), DNA ploidy status and phosphatase and tensin homologue (PTEN) expression in radical prostatectomy specimens (RP) from 304 patients followed for a median of 10 years (interquartile range 6–12). GS was assessed for every tumour-containing block and DNA ploidy for a median of four samples for each RP. In a subgroup of 40 patients we assessed DNA ploidy and PTEN status in every tumour-containing block. In 102 patients assigned to active surveillance (AS), GS and DNA ploidy were studied in needle biopsies. Results: Extensive heterogeneity was observed for GS (89% of the patients) and DNA ploidy (40% of the patients) in the cohort, and DNA ploidy (60% of the patients) and PTEN expression (75% of the patients) in the subgroup. DNA ploidy was a significant prognostic marker when heterogeneity was taken into consideration. In the AS cohort we found heterogeneity in GS (24%) and in DNA ploidy (25%) specimens. Conclusions: Multi-sample analysis should be performed to support clinical treatment decisions.

There is some evidence to suggest that radical treatment of the primary tumour in patients diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer can reduce symptomatic progression and increase survival. In this article, the author describes a pilot study to investigate whether a large study looking at survival benefit in early metastatic disease is feasible in the UK and calls for recruits.

Background High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) is a novel therapy for prostate cancer. Owing to a lack of long-term data, HIFU is recommended for use only in the context of research. Objective To examine the trend for HIFU use nationally and rates of strictures and fistulae. Design, setting, and participants Patients undergoing HIFU for prostate cancer between April 2007 and March 2018 were studied in an English national database (Hospital Episode Statistics). Data on complications were included for patients with a minimum of 1-yr follow-up. Analysis of complications was controlled for other interventions. Outcome measures and statistical analysis Descriptive analyses of HIFU rates and the incidence of strictures and fistulae were carried out. Cox and logistic regression models were built for urethral stricture incidence. Results and limitations A total of 2320 HIFU treatments among 1990 patients were identified. The median age was 67 yr (interquartile range 61–72). Some 1742 patients met the criteria for follow-up analysis. The highest-volume centre performed 1513 HIFU procedures, followed by 194 at the second highest. The number of HIFU procedures increased annually, rising from 196 to 283 per year. There were 208 patients (11.9%) who went on to have radiotherapy and 102 (5.9%) radical prostatectomy after HIFU. Following HIFU, stricture developed in 133/1290 patients (10.3%) and urinary fistula in 16/1240 (1.3%) before any further intervention. More recent years for HIFU were associated with a lower likelihood of stricture formation (2016/2017 vs 2007/2008: hazard ratio 0.30, 95% confidence interval 0.11–0.79; p = 0.015). Limitations include the lack of staging information and unknown rates of HIFU outside of publicly funded health care. Conclusions HIFU is performed at a large number of low-volume centres and complication rates do not differ from those for established therapies. Patient summary This report highlights the trend for provision of high-intensity focused ultrasound treatment for prostate cancer in England. The results suggest that the rate of urethral structural complications may not be lower than that for established prostate cancer treatments.

Pelvic lymph node dissection represents the gold standard of lymph node staging in patients with prostate cancer. We sought to assess the effect of extended pelvic lymph node dissection on oncologic outcomes in patients with characteristics of D'Amico intermediate or high risk prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy.In a multi-institutional database of 4 centers we identified 9,742 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy from 2000 to 2017 with or without pelvic lymph node dissection. Only patients with a greater than 5% probability of lymph node invasion according to the Briganti nomogram were included in study. We performed 2:1 propensity score matching to account for potential differences between the 2 cohortsOverall 707 patients (7.3%) did not undergo pelvic lymph node dissection, of whom 520 and 187 harbored D'Amico intermediate and high risk characteristics, respectively. A median of 14 lymph nodes (IQR 8-21) were removed in the pelvic lymph node dissection cohort and 1,714 of these cases (19.0%) harbored lymph node metastasis. After propensity score matching the biochemical recurrence-free, metastasis-free and cancer specific mortality-free survival rates were 60.4% vs 65.6% (p=0.07), 87.0% vs 90.0% (p=0.06) and 95.2% vs 96.4% (p=0.2) for pelvic lymph node dissection vs no pelvic lymph node dissection 120 months after radical prostatectomy. Multivariable Cox regression models adjusted for postoperative and preoperative tumor characteristics revealed that pelvic lymph node dissection performed at radical prostatectomy was no independent predictor of biochemical recurrence, metastasis or cancer specific mortality (all p ≥0.1).There was no significant difference in oncologic outcomes in patients with D'Amico high or intermediate risk prostate cancer in whom pelvic lymph node dissection was or was not performed at radical prostatectomy. The therapeutic value of pelvic lymph node dissection remains unclear.

ObjectiveTo describe how clinicians conceptualised equipoise in the PART (Partial prostate Ablation vs Radical prosTatectomy in intermediate‐risk unilateral clinically localised prostate cancer) feasibility study and how this affected recruitment.Subjects and MethodsPART included a QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI) to optimise recruitment. Phase I aimed to understand recruitment, and included: scrutinising recruitment data, interviewing the trial management group and recruiters (n = 13), and audio‐recording recruitment consultations (n = 64). Data were analysed using qualitative content and thematic analysis methods. In Phase II, strategies to improve recruitment were developed and delivered. ResultsInitially many recruiters found it difficult to maintain a position of equipoise and held preconceptions about which treatment was best for particular patients. They did not feel comfortable about approaching all eligible patients, and when the study was discussed, biases were conveyed through the use of terminology, poorly balanced information, and direct treatment recommendations. Individual and group feedback led to presentations to patients becoming clearer and enabled recruiters to reconsider their sense of equipoise. Although the precise impact of the QRI alone cannot be determined, recruitment increased (from a mean [range] of 1.4 [0–4] to 4.5 [0–12] patients/month) and the feasibility study reached its recruitment target.ConclusionAlthough clinicians find it challenging to recruit patients to a trial comparing different contemporary treatments for prostate cancer, training and support can enable recruiters to become more comfortable with conveying equipoise and providing clearer information to patients.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES:The STAMPEDE trial has shown a survival benefit for local radiation therapy in men with oligo-metastatic prostate cancer. Observational studies have suggested such benef...

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES:To assess the effect of extended pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) on oncologic outcomes in prostate cancer (PCa) patients with D'Amico intermediate- or high-risk char...

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES:In the last 15 years robotic surgery became the leading approach for treatment of prostate and kidney cancer. Following the success of these procedures, robotic system has been more recently applied to treat bladder cancer (BCa) but sparse data exists regarding the diffusion of robotic radical cystectomy (RARC) and its trend in contemporary patients. Aim of our study is comparing utilization trends and time-changes in perioperative outcomes of RARC using data from a large multicenter collaboration.METHODS:We retrospectively evaluated data from 2,713 patients treated with open radical cystectomy (ORC) and RARC for BCa at 16 American and European institutions between 2006 and 2018. All patients had completed data regarding pre-, intra- e post-operative characteristics. The Kruskal-Wallis test and Chi-square test evaluated differences between continuous and categorical variables, respectively.RESULTS:Overall, 971 (36%) patients underwent RARC and 1,705 (64%) ORC. RARC became the m...

Retzius sparing robotic assisted radical prostatectomy appears to have better continence rates when compared to conventional robotic assisted radical prostatectomy, however, concern with high positive surgical margin rates exist. To systematically evaluate evidence comparing functional and oncological outcomes of retzius sparing robotic assisted radical prostatectomy and conventional robotic assisted radical prostatectomy. The systematic review was performed in accordance with the Cochrane guidelines and the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA). Bibliographic databases searched were PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane central register of controlled trials—CENTRAL (in The Cochrane library—issue 1, 2018). We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of the evidence. The search retrieved 137 references through electronic searches of various databases. Six were included in the review. RS-RALP was associated with better early continence rates (≤ 1 month) (moderate quality evidence) (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.27, 2.32, p 0.0005) and at 3 months (low quality evidence) (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.03, 1.88, p 0.03). Time to continence recovery, number of pads used and pad weight are better with RS-RALP. Based on very low quality evidence, RS-RALP did not alter 6 and 12 months continence rates. Based on very low quality evidence, RS-RALP did not alter T2 positive margin rates (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.91, 3.06, p 0.10) and T3 positive margin rates (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.68, 1.70, p = 0.75). Short-term biochemical free survival appears to be similar between the two approaches. Based on low-quality evidence, RS-RALP did not alter overall and major complication rates. RS-RARP appears to have earlier continence recovery when compared to Con-RARP which does not come at a significant oncologic cost. Whilst there was a trend towards higher PSM rates with RS-RALP, this did not achieve statistical significance. Furthermore this trend appeared to be less pronounced with T3 disease, where the PSM rates are almost similar.

Objectives To analyse the perioperative and oncological outcomes of all radical prostatectomies (RPs) performed for high-risk prostate cancer in the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) national registry from 2014 to 2015. Patients and methods We identified and analysed outcomes of all RPs performed for high-risk prostate cancer (clinical stage >T2 and/or biopsy Gleason grade >7 and/or preoperative prostate-specific antigen level ≥20 ng/mL) in the national registry for 2014 and 2015. Surgeon reporting of data was mandated during this period. Institution and individual surgeon volume-outcome relationships were assessed. Results In total, 3671/13 947 (26.3%) patients underwent RP for high-risk prostate cancer over the 2-year period. Robot-assisted RP was the most prevalent approach (60.7%). In all, 39% of men received an extended pelvic lymph node dissection (LND), but over one-third (33.8%) had no LND. Minimally invasive techniques were associated with a significantly shorter length of stay. The reported rates of Clavien-Dindo ≥III complications within the dataset were low (2.0%), regardless of surgical modality or surgeon volume. No statistically significant surgeon volume-outcome relationships were identified when surgeon volume was stratified into tertiles. Conclusion RP for high-risk prostate cancer in the UK appears safe, regardless of modality used or surgeon volume. No clear evidence that surgeon volume impacts on early perioperative outcomes was seen. Quality assurance of the surgeon-reported BAUS dataset is now required to drive quality improvement in national practice.

Introduction We evaluated patient, hospital, and cancer-specific factors associated with positive surgical margin (PSM) variability after radical prostatectomy in pT2 prostate cancer in the United States. Patients and Methods A total of 45,426 men from 1152 hospitals with pT2 prostate cancer and known margin status after radical prostatectomy were identified using the National Cancer Database (2010-2015). Data on patient, cancer, hospital factors, and surgical approach were extracted. A mixed effects logistic regression model was computed to examine factors associated with PSM and partial R2 values to assess the relative contributions of patient, cancer, and hospital variables to PSM status. Results Median PSM rate of 8.5% (interquartile range, 5.2%-13.0%). Robotic (odds ratio [OR], 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-0.99) and laparoscopic (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.64-0.90) surgical approach, academic institution (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-1.00) and high hospital surgical volume (>297 cases [OR], 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70-0.99) were independently associated with a lower PSM. Black men (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.01-1.26) and adverse cancer-specific features (prostate-specific antigen [PSA], 10-20; PSA >20; cT3 stage; Gleason 7, 8, 9-10; all P > .01) were independently associated with a higher PSM. Patient-specific, hospital-specific, and cancer-specific factors had a contribution of 2.3%, 3.9%, and 15.2%, respectively, to the variation in PSM. Facility had a contribution of 23.7% to the variation in PSM. Conclusion Cancer-specific factors account for 15.2% of PSM variation with the remaining 84.8% of PSM variation due to patient, hospital, and other factors not accounted within the model. Noncancer-specific factors represent addressable factors that are important for policy-makers in efforts to improve patient outcome.