Long-Term Outcomes Following Bipolar Transurethral Plasma Enucleation of the Prostate: 10-Year Follow-Up.

Background and Purpose: The aim of our study is to assess the long-term outcomes and safety of bipolar transurethral plasma enucleation of the prostate (B-TUEP) in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in a single-center cohort study. Our focus is to evaluate the impact on outcomes after 10 years of follow-up (FUP) in terms of recurrence, LUTS, and patients' quality of life after B-TUEP in prostates between 30 and 80 cc. Materials and Methods: Between May 2010 and December 2011, all consecutive patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia undergoing B-TUEP were prospectively enrolled in our study. Data on patients' history, physical examination, prostate volumes, erectile function, prostate-specific antigen levels, International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS), and uroflowmetry were collected at 0, 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 60, and 120 months. Early and long-term complications were recorded. Results: A total of 50 consecutive patients underwent B-TUEP in our facility, all performed by a single surgeon (R.G.). Twelve patients were excluded during the 10 years. No patients had persistent bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) requiring reoperation. In terms of results, the improvement in IPSS was sustained throughout 5 years, and the mean difference from baseline at 5 years was 17 points, with similar results at 10 years. Erectile function was also slightly improved after surgery and maintained for the next 5 years, with a slight age-related decrease at 10 years. Furthermore, the improvements in maximum urine flow rate (Qmax) were maintained at 5 years, with a mean improvement of 16 mL/s, while at 10 years, it settled on a mean improvement from baseline of 12 mL/s. Conclusions: In our 10 years' experience, B-TUEP is a safe and highly effective technique for relieving BOO, with excellent outcomes and no recurrence at 10 years of FUP. Further multicenter studies should confirm our results.

Shockwave Therapy for Erectile Dysfunction: Which Gives the Best Results? A Retrospective National, Multi-Institutional Comparative Study of Different Shockwave Technologies.

BACKGROUND: Low-intensity shockwave therapy (Li-SWT) is a promising option for the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED). Many devices with different characteristics in terms of generators, shockwaves, set-up parameters and procedure protocols are commercially available. In this report, we present our experience with the main shockwave technologies currently in use in clinical practice for ED treatment. METHODS: A retrospective national, multi-institutional study was performed to compare the effects of different shockwave technologies in ED patients. All of the subjects underwent 8 consecutive weekly physical treatments with SWT under either a focused or non-focused regimen: 3,000 shocks per session at 0.09 mJ/mm2 and 10,000 shocks per session at 15 Hz and 90 mJ, respectively. Efficacy was evaluated by comparing pre- and post-treatment Sexual Health Inventory in Men (SHIM) scores, International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) and Erection Hardness Score (EHS). Possible relationships between type of shockwave generator, source, morphology and type of ED were investigated. RESULTS: A total of 94 men were included in the analysis. There were no significant differences in the baseline clinical characteristics or demographics. The mean (SD) increase in the scores from questionnaires evaluated at 8 weeks was clinically and statistically significant, with overall improvements of +5.49, +5.47 and +1.18 (p<0.0001) in the IIEF-5, SHIM, and EHS scores, respectively. The increases in these scores were evaluated by a multiple regression analysis, in relation to the shockwave generator, type of ED, shockwave source and morphology, but none of the factors examined predicted improvement. No side effects were reported with any device. CONCLUSIONS: SWT is a clinically effective and safe treatment for ED that is independent of the generator type, source, shockwave morphology emitted, type of ED and perhaps treatment protocol.

Development of a nomogram predicting the probability of stone free rate in patients with ureteral stones eligible for semi-rigid primary laser uretero-litothripsy.

PURPOSE: Few tools are available to predict uretero-lithotripsy outcomes in patients with ureteral stones. Aim of our study was to develop a nomogram predicting the probability of stone free rate in patients undergoing semi-rigid uretero-lithotripsy (ULT) for ureteral stones. METHODS: From January 2014 onwards, patients undergoing semi-rigid Ho: YAG laser uretero-lithotripsy for ureteral stones were prospectively enrolled in two centers. Patients were preoperatively evaluated with accurate clinical history, urinalysis and renal function. Non-contrast CT was used to define number, location and length of the stones and eventually the presence of hydronephrosis. A nomogram was generated based on the logistic regression model used to predict ULT success. RESULTS: Overall, 356 patients with mean age of 54 years (IQR 44/65) were enrolled. 285/356 (80%) patients were stone free at 1 month. On multivariate analysis single stone (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.05-3.53, p = 0.034), stone size (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.87-0.97, p = 0.005), distal position (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.29-3.48, p = 0.003) and the absence of hydronephrosis (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.08-3.78, p = 0.029) were predictors of success and these were used to develop a nomogram. The nomogram based on the model presented good discrimination (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.75), good calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow test, p > 0.5) and a net benefit in the range of probabilities between 15 and 65%. Internal validation resulted in an AUC of 0.74. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of our nomogram could better council patients before treatment and could be used to identify patients at risk of failure. External validation is warranted before its clinical implementation.

Radical penectomy, a compromise for life: results from the PECAD study.

BACKGROUND: The use of organ sparing strategies to treat penile cancer (PC) is currently supported by evidence that has indicated the safety, efficacy and benefit of this surgery. However, radical penectomy still represents up to 15-20% of primary tumor treatments in PC patients. The aim of the study was to evaluate efficacy in terms of overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of radical penectomy in PC patients. METHODS: Data from a retrospective multicenter study (PEnile Cancer ADherence study, PECAD Study) on PC patients treated at 13 European and American urological centers (Hospital "Sant'Andrea", Sapienza University, Roma, Italy; "G.D'Annunzio" University, Chieti and ASL 2 Abruzzo, Hospital "S. Pio da Pietrelcina", Vasto, Italy; Department of Genitourinary Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA; Hospital of Budapest, Hungary; Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, Urology and Andrology Unit II, University of Bari, Italy; Hospital "Spedali Civili", Brescia, Italy; Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; University of Modena & Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy; Hospital Universitario La Paz, Madrid, Spain; Ceara Cancer Institute, Fortaleza, Brazil; Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA; Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece; Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center, Warsaw, Poland) between 2010 and 2016 were used. Medical records of patients who specifically underwent radical penectomy were reviewed to identify main clinical and pathological variables. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate 1- and 5-year OS and DFS. RESULTS: Of the entire cohort of 425 patients, 72 patients (16.9%) treated with radical penectomy were extracted and were considered for the analysis. The median age was 64.5 (IQR, 57.5-73.2) years. Of all, 41 (56.9%) patients had pT3/pT4 and 31 (43.1%) pT1/pT2. Moreover, 36 (50.0%) were classified as pN1-3 and 5 (6.9%) M1. Furthermore, 61 (84.7%) had a high grade (G2-G3) with 6 (8.3%) positive surgical margins. The 1- and 5-year OS rates were respectively 73.3% and 59.9%, while the 1- and 5-year DFS rates were respectively 67.3% and 35.1%. CONCLUSIONS: PC is an aggressive cancer particularly in more advanced stage. Overall, more than a third of patients do not survive at 5 years and more than 60% report a disease recurrence, despite the use of a radical treatment.

Managing lines of therapy in castration-resistant prostate cancer: real-life snapshot from a multicenter cohort.

PURPOSE: To provide a snapshot of toxicities and oncologic outcomes of Abiraterone (AA) and Enzalutamide (EZ) in a chemo-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCPRC) population from a longitudinal real-life multicenter cohort. METHODS: We prospectively collected data on chemo-naïve mCRPC patients treated with AA or EZ. Primary outcomes were PSA response, oncologic outcomes and toxicity profile. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare differences in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) between AA vs EZ and high- vs low-volume disease cohorts. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of PFS. Toxicity, PSA response rates and oncologic outcomes on second line were compared with those observed on first line. RESULTS: Out of 137 patients, 88 received AA, and 49 EZ. On first line, patients receiving EZ had significantly higher PSA response compared with AA (95.9% vs 67%, p < 0.001), comparable toxicity rate (10.2% vs 16.3%, p = 0.437) and PFS probabilities (p = 0.145). Baseline PSA and high-volume disease were predictors of lower PFS probabilities at univariable analysis (p = 0.027 and p = 0.007, respectively). Overall, 28 patients shifted to a second-line therapy (EZ or radiometabolic therapy). Toxicity and PSA response rates on second line were comparable to those observed on first line (11.1% vs 12.4%, p = 0.77; 73.1% vs 77.4%, p = 0.62, respectively); 2-year PFS, cancer-specific and overall survival probabilities were comparable to those displayed in first-line cohort (12.1% vs 16.2%, p = 0.07; 85.7% vs 86.4%, p = 0.98; 71% vs 80.3%, p = 0.66, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Toxicity profile, PSA response rate and oncological outcomes were comparable between first-line and second-line courses in patients treated with either AA or EZ for mCRPC. Our findings showed the tolerability and oncological effectiveness, when feasible, of two lines of therapy other than chemotherapy.

The Surgical Experience Influences the Safety and Efficacy of Photovaporization of Prostate with 180-W XPS GreenLight Laser: Comparison Between Novices vs Expert Surgeons Learning Curves.

PURPOSE: To assess the extent to which surgical experience can affect perioperative and functional outcomes after photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) with 180W XPX GreenLight laser in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from 291 consecutive patients with symptomatic BPO (median follow-up 12 m) were collected and analyzed. Patients were treated at 2 different institutions by 2 expert (G1, n = 182) and 2 novice (G2, n = 109) transurethral prostate surgeons (February 2013 - March 2017) and underwent standard or anatomical PVP depending on surgeons' preferences. Patients' characteristics, perioperative and functional outcomes were compared using the chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests. Patients' satisfaction was measured using the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) score. Learning curves were analyzed based on changes in quantitative parameters: surgery time, lasing/operative time, and energy delivered (kJ). RESULTS: Patients' baseline characteristics, perioperative data and PGI-I score were similar. Overall the complication rates showed better trends for G1. Serum prostate-specific antigen levels, maximum flow rate, and International Prostatic Symptoms Score improved in both groups, with perceived improvements greater in G2 (p < 0.006). Lasing time/operative time ratio showed greater evolution for G1 than G2 (0.50:IQR 0.38-0.60 vs 0.46:IQR 0.34-0.58, respectively)(p = 0.201). A major increase in energy delivery for G2 was achieved within the first 50 procedures, whereas more than 100 iterations were needed for G1 to reach LT/OT >60%. CONCLUSION: Surgeons' background and expertise appear to affect outcomes over the learning curve, with roughly similar perioperative and functional results.

Monocenter Experience with 532 Nm-Laser Photoselective-Vaporization of the Prostate by GreenLight XPS™ Laser: Is It Really an Endourological Joker Card?

INTRODUCTION: In our study, we reported on our monocenter experience with GreenLight (GL) Xcelerated Performance System (XPS)™ /MoXy™ laser fiber (American Medical Systems Inc., Minnetonka, Minnesota), examining its efficacy, safety, and its ability to effectively treat lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in benign prostate obstruction (BPO). We also explored and compared the three different endoscopic approaches used for GL treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), standard photovaporization (PVP), anatomical PVP, and GreenLight XPS™ enucleation of the prostate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between February 2013 and April 2017, 140 patients, with an average age of 67.7 years (range 47-85), were treated using the XPS™/MoXy™ system in a single-operative urologic center. The data were retrospectively analyzed with an assessment of the main intra- and postoperative outcomes at three, six, 12, and 18 months comparing both subjective (international prostate symptom score [IPSS]) and objective (uroflow [Qmax] parameters and prostate volume) parameters to the preoperative data. Patients underwent standard PVP, anatomical PVP, or prostate photo-selective en-bloc enucleation (PEBE) according to surgeon preferences. RESULTS: Median prostate volume (MPV) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) were 69cc and 3.24 ng/dl, respectively. An indwelling catheter, at the time of surgery, was observed in 15% of men. Median operative-laser time and energy applied were 56.4 minutes, 26.5 minutes, and 245813 kJ. Outpatient surgery was feasible with median length of stay at 48 hours. Significant improvement in IPSS and Qmax are observed at all endpoints. No significant intraoperative complications were reported. When stratifying postoperative complications according to the Cavien-Dindo classification, only two cases of high-degree emerged (grades III-IV). CONCLUSION: Our data confirm that in treating men with symptomatic benign prostate disease, the GreenLight XPS™/MoXy™ laser fiber is safe and able to achieve challenging results in terms of clinical outcomes and prostate volume reduction. Balance between functional outcomes and complications was great without statistically significant differences, in terms of outcomes, between the different surgical techniques.