MR-guided focused ultrasound surgery for localized prostate cancer: a preliminary investigation / 中华放射学杂志

Objective:To investigate the safety and efficacy of MR-guided focused ultrasound surgery (MRgFUS) in treating localized prostate cancer.Methods:Six patients with localized prostate cancer who underwent MRgFUS treatment from August 2020 to September 2021 in Beijing Hospital were prospectively enrolled in this study. The patients were all over 18 years old, with an average age of (68±10) years, and had not received any prior treatment for prostate cancer. Pretreatment pelvic MR and CT scans were performed to determine the region of treatment (ROT). Different urinary catheterization measures were given based on the location of the lesion. Under general anesthesia, the lesions were treated by MRgFUS using a specialized rectal ultrasound transducer on the treatment bed. The patients were followed up at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment and annually thereafter. During follow-up, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, pelvic MR scans, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), International Index of Erectile Function-15 (IIEF-15) scores, and adverse events were assessed.Results:(1) All six patients underwent MRgFUS treatment for six lesions, with an average duration of (126±56) minutes, an average number of (7.3±3.2) focal ultrasound pulses per lesion, and an average non-perfusion volume of (3.8±1.1) cm 3, which covered the entire treatment target area. No treatment-related adverse events were reported. (2) The PSA levels at baseline, 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment were (6.6±0.8), (3.6±1.3), (3.4±3.0), (2.5±1.7), and (2.3±1.8) ng/ml, respectively. PSA levels increased in 2 out of 6 patients during follow-up, and pelvic MR scan revealed recurrent lesions, while PSA levels continued to decrease in the remaining 4 patients, and pelvic MR scan were normal. (3) The IPSS scores at baseline, 1, and 3 months after treatment were 13.0 (4.0, 16.0), 10.0 (4.0, 12.0), and 5.0 (3.0, 6.0) points, respectively. For the three sexually active patients, the IIEF-15 scores at baseline were 40, 51, and 14 points, respectively, and IIEF-15 at 1 month after treatment were 9, 8, and 14 points, respectively, and at 3 months after treatment were 9, 66 and 26 points, respectively. (4) One patient was diagnosed with recurrence 10 months after treatment, and another patient was found to have a new lesion 6 months after treatment. Conclusions:MRgFUS might be a safe, non-invasive, and effective treatment for localized prostate cancer, but regular follow-up is vital for detecting tumor recurrence.

Surgical techniques and short-term outcomes of transvesical robot assisted radical prostatectomy / 中华泌尿外科杂志

Objective To introduce the technique and report our initial experience of transvesical robot assisted radical prostatectomy (TvRARP).Methods From April 2018 to August 2018,10 patients underwent TvRARP performed by a single surgical team were retrospectively reviewed.Preoperative data of patients [aged (58.6 ± 9.4) years,BMI (26.5 ± 3.1) kg/m2,tPSA (19.5 ± 4.1) ng/ml,biopsy Gleason score 6(6-7),prostate volume (33.4 ± 15.8) ml and IIEF-5 score 12 (10-16)] were collected.Preoperative study revealed 8 cases of cT1c,1 case of cT2a and 1 case of cT2b.All patients were continent preoperatively.During the surgical procedure,the bladder was opened,and a circumferential incision was then made around the internal urethral orifice.Initially,posterior dissection of bilateral vas deferens and seminal vesicles was performed,followed by posterior dissection towards apex.Lateral dissection of neurovascular bundles was performed before anterior dissection towards apex.The exposed urethra was transected and specimen was removed.Vesicourethral anastomosis and closure of bladder was performed in a standard way.Results All 10 cases were successfully performed robotically without conversion,transfusion or other major intraoperative or postoperative complications.Postoperative pathology confirmed 6 cases of pT2a,3 cases of pT2b and 1 case of pT2c [median Gleason score 6 (6-7)].One case was reported positive surgical margin.Operative time was (140.5 ± 35.5) mins.Estimated blood loss was (65.5 ± 35.5) ml.Urethral catheter was removed at 7 days postoperatively.Nine patients achieved urinary continence (0 pads) immediately after the removal of urinary catheter,while 1 patient returned to full continence at 2 weeks postoperatively.During a mean follow-up of 3 months (2-4 months),no biochemical recurrence was detected (tPSA ＜ 0.2 ng/ml).At 2 months postoperatively,IIEF-5 score was 11 (8-13) and no statistically difference was made compared with preoperative data (p ＞ 0.05).Conclusions Transvesical approach is a valid alternative of RARP in patients bearing localized low-risk prostate cancer.Tumor control and preservation of erectile function remains to be determined by long term follow-up.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy versus conventional intensity-modulated radiation therapy for the treatment of prostate cancer / 中华男科学杂志

Objective@#To explore the efficacy and toxicity of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) versus conventional intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in the treatment of prostate cancer.@*METHODS@#Forty patients with localized prostate adenocarcinoma received SBRT for 5 doses totaling 36.25 Gy (n = 20) or IMRT for 42 doses totaling 75.6 Gy (n = 20). We compared the post-therapeutic PSA levels and related toxic reactions between the two groups of patients and recorded the rates of 5-year overall survival and freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF).@*RESULTS@#The minimum level of PSA was 0.41 (0－1.25) μg/L at 2 years and 0.22 (0.1－1.4) μg/L at 3 years after radiotherapy in the SBRT group, significantly lower than 0.62 (0－2.4) μg/L and 0.47 (0－2.5) μg/L in the IMRT group (P < 0.05), while the time to the minimum PSA level was markedly shorter in the IMRT than in the SBRT group (27.9 ［1.0－40.8］ vs 33.6 ［2.7－41.6］ mo, P < 0.05). The change rate of the PSA level was remarkably higher in the SBRT than in the IMRT group at 2 and 3 years after treatment (－0.06 and －0.05 μg/L/mo vs －0.04 and －0.02 μg/L/mo, P < 0.05). No statistically significant difference was observed in the 5-year overall survival between the SBRT and IMRT groups (91.1% vs 86.7%, P = 0.158).@*CONCLUSIONS@#SBRT and IMRT are comparable in therapeutic effect and toxicity, but the former has the advantages of low cost and convenient application and is therefore more suitable as an alternative treatment of localized prostate cancer.

Outcomes Following Various Treatment Options for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer

For the several decades, the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancers has been largely represented by surgery, radiotherapy, and observation. Until recently, this has not changed much. In particular, curative treatment through surgery or radiotherapy is considered to be of no great benefit in elderly patients with low-risk groups. Thus, these strategies are recommended only in moderate or high-risk patients with a life expectancy of 10 years or more. In general, surgery and radiotherapy have been reported to be similar in terms of oncologic outcomes, but the level 1 evidence was lacking to support this to date. Recent advances in imaging modalities have led to the introduction of treatments for the concept of focal therapy, such as high-intensity frequency ultrasound or cryotherapy. Subsequently, positive results have been reported in terms of functional outcomes. However, the level of evidence is not high due to the short follow-up period and the absence of large-scale prospective studies. For the reasons described above, counseling and decision-making were not straightforward. Consequently, the treatment strategy for each individual patient was determined mainly on the risk of incontinence, erectile dysfunction, or other adverse effects of radiotherapy. To overcome these limitations, substantial studies have been reported evaluating survival outcomes and complications following treatments of localized prostate cancer for the past several years. In this review, we aimed to summarize recent literatures on surgery, radiotherapy, and expectant management, which have been the mainstays of treatment for localized prostate cancer; and introduce several treatments for the concept of focal therapy.

The value of DWI and ADC of 1.5T magnetic resonance in differential diagnosis for localized prostate cancer, chronic inflammatory response and benign hyperplasia / 中国医学装备

Objective:To compare and analyze the value of diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) of 1.5T magnetic resonance (MR) in differential diagnosis for localized prostate cancer, chronic inflammatory response and benign hyperplasia.Methods: 80 patients with localized prostate cancer were enrolled in the research. The signal to noise ratio (SNR) of DWI, ADC value and semi-quantitative classification of DWI on lesions were measured, and the diagnostic efficiencies of them were compared by using ROC curve.Results: In the 80 patients with localized prostate cancer patients, there were 52 malignant lesions and 43 benign lesions in peripheral band, and there were 31 malignant lesions and 46 benign lesions in central gland. The ADC values of prostate cancer in peripheral band and central gland were 0.91±0.12 and 0.86±0.15, respectively, and they were significantly lower than that of normal tissue (1.68±0.23 and 1.28±0.31) and benign lesions (1.24±0.21 and 1.12±0.16). The semi-quantitative classifications of DWI for benign lesions were significantly higher than that for malignant lesions in peripheral band and central gland, respectively (x2=20.88,x2=12.14;P<0.05). For the diagnostic efficiency of ADC, the sensitivities of benign and malignant lesions in peripheral band and malignant gland were 91.3% and 79.1%, respectively, and the specificities of them were 89.6% and 70.2%. And they was significant higher than the corresponding sensitivities (71.2% and 51.3%)and specificities (78.4% and 65.8%) of DWI imaging.Conclusion: Both of DWI and ADC of 1.5T magnetic resonance are the important indexes in differential diagnosis for prostate cancer, chronic inflammatory response and benign hyperplasia, while ADC value is better than DWI image in the clinical efficiency.

Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR Imaging in Detecting Local Tumor Progression after HIFU Ablation of Localized Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE: To retrospectively evaluate the diagnostic performance of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging (DCE-MRI) in detecting recurrent prostate cancer after HIFU of clinically localized cancer, as compared with T2-weighted imaging (T2WI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-six patients with increased prostate-specific antigen levels after HIFU were included in this study. All MR examinations were performed using T2WI and DCE-MRI, followed by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. MRI and biopsy results were correlated in six prostate sectors. Residual or recurrent cancer after HIFU was defined as local tumor progression if biopsy results showed any cancer foci. Two independent readers interpreted the MR images. RESULTS: Of 156 prostate sectors, 51 (33%) were positive for cancer in 17 patients. For detecting local tumor progression, the sensitivity of DCE-MRI and T2WI was 80% and 57% for reader 1 (P 0.05). Interobserver agreement of DCE-MRI and T2WI was moderate and fair, respectively. CONCLUSION: For detecting local tumor progression of prostate cancer after HIFU, DCE-MRI was more sensitive than T2WI, with less interobserver variability.

Relación entre el diagnóstico clínico preoperatorio y el histopatológico posoperatorio, en pacientes con cáncer prostático localizado / Relationship between clinical preoperative diagnosis and postoperative histology in patients with localized prostate cancer

Introducción: Las variables relevantes preoperatorias con que cuenta el urólogo para una toma de decisión frente a un cáncer prostático localizado son: la edad, el tacto rectal, el antígeno prostático específico (APE) e informe histológico de la biopsia por punción con el Gleason. Además se pueden incluir otras variables como el volumen prostático, número de muestras de biopsias positivas, porcentaje de la muestra comprometida, etc. Nosotros quisimos evaluar el grado de concordancia entre el diagnóstico clínico-patológico preoperatorio con el hallazgo histológico, posoperatorio en pacientes prostatectomizados, debido a la implicancia pronóstica y en la toma de decisión que pudiese tener. Material y Método: Se estudiaron retrospectivamente 119 prostatectomías radicales entre marzo de 2004 y junio de 2009. Se consideraron: edad, tacto, antígeno prostático específico (APE) y score de Gleason. Se excluyeron pacientes con tratamiento antiandrogénico u hormonal neoadjuvante. Resultados: En el preoperatorio la mediana de edad fue de 66 años (61-68), de APE 7,35 ng/ml (5,38-11,8) y de Gleason fue de 6 (5-7). El 87,4 por ciento de los pacientes tenía un APE >4,0 ng/ml. El 54 por ciento (n= 64) tenía un estadio clínico T1c y el 46 por ciento (n= 55) un estadio T2. En el posoperatorio 23,5 por ciento (n= 28) tuvo un estadio pT2 y el 74 por ciento (n= 88) un estadio pT3. En pacientes con estadio pT2 el APE preoperatorio fue de 5,9 ng/ml (4,4-9,4), en el estadio pT3 fue de 7,9 ng/ml (5,7-12,8). El score de Gleason en pT2 fue de 5 (5-6), en el pT3 fue de 6 (5-7). No encontramos diferencia de edad en los estadios pT2 (67 años) y pT3 (68 años). Conclusiones: En el estudio histopatológico posoperatorio de pacientes con estadio clínico T1c y T2, se confirmó un estadio pT2 sólo en 23,5 por ciento, el 74 por ciento tenían un estadio pT3 (a, b). En el cáncer prostático localizado, el tacto rectal no fue útil en su correlación con el estadio histológico...

Introduction: Relevant preoperative variables in patients with localized prostate cancer are: age, digital rectal examination (DRE), prostatic specific antigen (PSA) level and Gleason score in the transrectal biopsy. Other variables include prostate volume, number of positive biopsy samples, percentage of involvement in the biopsy, etc. We evaluated the agreement between the preoperative clinico pathologic diagnosis and the postoperative histology report in patients submitted to prostatectomy. Material and method: This is a retrospective review of 119 radical prostatectomies performed between March 2004 and June 2009. We recorded age, DRE, PSA level, and Gleason score. Patients receiving anti-androgenic treatment or neoadjuvant hormonal treatment were excluded. Results: Preoperative findings: median age was 66 years (61-68), median PSA level was 7.35 ng/ml(5.38-11.8) and median Gleason score was 6 (5-7). PSA level >4 ng/ml was found in 87.4 percent of the patients. Clinical stage T1c was found in 54 percent (n=64) of the cases whereas 46 percent (n=55) were stage T2. Postoperative findings: stage pT2 was found in 23.5 percent (n=28) of the patients whereas 74 percent (n =88)were pT3 stage. In pT2 patients, preoperative PSA was 5,9 ng/ml (4.4-9.4). In pT3 patients, PSA was7.9 ng/ml (5.7-12.8). Gleason score in pT2 was 5 (5-6); in pT3 patients, Gleason score was 6 (5-7). No age difference was found between pT2 stage (67 years) and pT3 stage (68 years).Conclusions: Postoperative histology in patients with T1c and T2 stages confirmed a pT2 stage only in 23.5 percent of the cases; 74 percent of the cases were pT3 (a,b) stage. In localized prostate cancer, DRE was not useful for the correlation with pathologic staging, especially for stage pT3 cases. Preoperative Gleason score was relatively useful; we found understaging 36.2 percent of the cases and overstaging 21.8 percent of the patients. These variables should be considered in the initial evaluation of...

Nerve sparing radical prostatectomy in an 18-year-old boy with localized poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma

Prostate cancer is predominantly a disease of the elderly male, with more than 75 percent diagnosed older than 65 years. Occurrence of the disease is uncommon in those less than 50 years of age and very rare in the adolescent. The case presented is an 18 year old male who went into urinary retention with associated significant weight loss and gross hematuria. Patient was diagnosed to have clinically localized prostate adenocarcinoma. He underwent radical prostatectomy. Based on literature search, this is the youngest reported case of prostatic adenocarcinoma in the Philippines, the 3rd youngest case in the world and the youngest case of localized prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy. (Author)