ABLATE: a score to predict complications and recurrence rate in percutaneous treatments of renal lesions.

RENAL score has been validated on predicting adverse events and relapses in percutaneous treatments of renal lesions. To better fit interventional issues a modified score (mRENAL) has been introduced, but the only difference from the RENAL score is on the dimensional parameter. However, it remains of surgical derivation while a specific interventional score is missing. This study aims to obtain a specific score (ABLATE) to better quantify the risk of complications and relapses in percutaneous kidney ablation procedures compared to the existing surgical scores. Taking inspiration from previous papers, a score was built to quantify the real difficulties faced in percutaneous treatment of renal lesions. The ABLATE score was used on 71 cryoablations to evaluate its predictivity of complications and relapses. Logistic regression was used to predict complication incidence; Cox-regression was used for relapses; ROC analysis was used to evaluate the accuracy of the different scores. Between January 2014 and November 2019, 71 lesions in 68 patients were treated. Overall, malignant histology was found in 62 lesions (87.3%). Mean and median RENAL, mRENAL, and ABLATE scores were 7.04 and 7, 7.19 and 7, and 5.11 and 4, respectively. Out of 71 treatments, we experienced 3 bleeding with anemia (4.2%), only 2 of which needed further treatment (2.82%). The mean and median RENAL, mRENAL, and ABLATE scores in those with complications were 7.66 and 7.01 (p = 0.69), 8.0 and 7.1 (p = 0.54), and 6.6 and 5.0 (p = 0.38), respectively. Out of 62 malignant lesions, we experienced 2 persistent and 6 recurrent lesions (3.2% and 8.4%, respectively). At Cox-regression analyses, mABLATE score outperformed both RENAL and mRENAL scores in predicting recurrences (HR 1.48; p < 0.001 vs. 1.41; p = 0.1 vs. 1.38: p = 0.07, respectively). The ABLATE score showed to be a better predictor of relapses than RENAL and mRENAL. The small number of complications conditioned a lack of statistic power on complications for all the scores. At the moment to quantify the risks in percutaneous kidney ablation procedures, surgical scores are used. A specific score better performs this task.

Not All Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsies Are Equal: The Impact of the Type of Approach and Operator Expertise on the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The extensive use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has led to an even more widespread use of different targeted biopsy techniques and approaches. The best way of performing targeted biopsies and the effect of operator expertise have still to be defined. OBJECTIVE: To compare the rate of detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) of different mpMRI targeted approaches and to assess the role of operator expertise in the detection of csPCa. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We included 244 consecutive patients who underwent both 12-core transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy and mpMRI targeted biopsy with either a cognitive biopsy (CB) or fusion biopsy (FB) approach during the same session between 2013 and 2016 at a single tertiary referral centre. INTERVENTION: All men underwent 1.5-T mpMRI with an endorectal coil. All biopsies were performed by three operators as their first cases of targeted biopsy. Lesions with a Prostate Imaging Recording and Data System (PI-RADS) v.2 score of ≥3 detected at mpMRI were targeted. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: csPCa was defined as disease with a Gleason score at biopsy of ≥7. Operator expertise was coded as the progressive number of targeted biopsies performed by each physician. Multivariable logistic regression analyses (MVA) were used to assess the association between the targeted biopsy technique (FB vs CB) and operator expertise for detection of csPCa. Covariates consisted of prostate-specific antigen, prostate volume, PI-RADS v.2 (3 vs >3), number of targeted cores per MRI lesion, and digital rectal examination (negative vs positive). The same analyses were performed for patients undergoing FB only after accounting for the FB approach (transrectal vs transperineal). A lowess smoothing weighted function was used to graphically assess the effect of operator expertise on the probability of detecting csPCa, after accounting for all confounders. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 157 patients (64%) underwent FB and 87 (36%) underwent CB. The overall csPCa detection rate was 58% for FB and 45% for CB (p=0.07). A significantly higher rate of csPCa detection in targeted samples was observed for FB compared to CB (57% vs 36%; p=0.002). On MVA, FB and operator expertise were significantly associated with a higher probability of csPCa detection in targeted samples (odds ratio [OR] 2.4 and 1.7, respectively; both p≤0.03). When the same analyses were repeated for patients undergoing FB, operator expertise remained an independent predictor of csPCa detection (OR 1.9; p=0.004). An increase in the probability of detecting csPCa with the number of procedures performed was observed after accounting for all confounders. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that FB had higher detection rate than CB for csPCa. Moreover, operator expertise was significantly associated with higher detection rates for csPCa. PATIENT SUMMARY: When different targeted biopsy techniques were compared, fusion biopsy provided a higher detection rate compared to cognitive biopsy for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Moreover, we found that operator expertise was an important predictor of the detection of csPCa, regardless of the procedure used.

Initial extended transrectal prostate biopsy--are more prostate cancers detected with 18 cores than with 12 cores?

PURPOSE: We retrospectively investigated the detection rates of prostate cancer, high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and atypical glands suggestive of carcinoma by initial 18 and 12-core prostate biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 3,460 consecutive patients with prostate specific antigen between 2.5 and 15 ng/ml underwent 12 (1,684) or 18 (1,776) core prostate biopsy under local anesthesia at 2 departments that adopted the same indications for performing biopsy. Biopsies were evenly distributed throughout the prostate in 6 sectors. In the 12-core prostate biopsy group 2 samples were obtained from each sector and in the 18-core prostate biopsy group 1 additional core was taken from each sector. RESULTS: The cancer detection rate in patients who underwent 18-core prostate biopsy was not different from the rate in those who underwent 12-core prostate biopsy (39.9% and 38.4%, p = 0.37), nor did the detection of atypical glands suggestive of carcinoma differ significantly between the 2 groups (2.9% and 3.3%, respectively, p = 0.33). However, 18-core prostate biopsy detected a significantly higher percent of cases of high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (20.0% vs 12.9%, p = 0.001). The cancer detection rate was higher with 18 than with 12-core prostate biopsy in patients with a prostate volume of 55 cc or greater (31.5% vs 24.8%, p = 0.01) but not in those with a prostate volume of less than 55 cc (54.3% and 53.0%, respectively, p = 0.7). Moreover, we determined that patients with positive digital rectal examination findings do not need 18-core prostate biopsy as opposed to 12-core prostate biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with 12-core prostate biopsy, 18-core prostate biopsy detects significantly more cases of high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. However, 18-core prostate biopsy detects a significantly higher number of cancer only in patients with a prostate volume of 55 cc or greater.

Safety and tolerability of oral erectile dysfunction treatments in the elderly.

Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a common medical condition that affects the sexual life of millions of men worldwide. It is generally accepted that sexual function tends to decline with aging, which is often associated with a higher prevalence of sexual problems, including ED and loss of libido. As the mean age of men seeking medical help for sexual dysfunction continues to increase, it is important to assess the safety and tolerability of currently available medical treatments in elderly men, who often share other co-morbidities that should be carefully evaluated when any type of ED therapy is considered. With this aim in mind, a MEDLINE search was conducted from 1 January 1998 to 31 May 2004 to identify studies assessing the efficacy, safety and tolerability of treatments for ED in the elderly. Particular care was taken to assess the cardiovascular safety of oral drugs for ED in this subset of patients, who often have multiple cardiovascular risk factors which contribute to a complicated clinical scenario. The most important conclusion of the paper is that the high efficacy, reliability, safety and tolerability of oral ED treatments makes them appropriate first-line therapies for elderly patients with ED.

A prospective study comparing paroxetine alone versus paroxetine plus sildenafil in patients with premature ejaculation.

PURPOSE: We compared the efficacy of paroxetine alone and combined with sildenafil in patients complaining of premature ejaculation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Enrolled in this study were 80 consecutive potent men 19 to 47 years old (mean age 34) with premature ejaculation but without any obvious organic cause. Pretreatment evaluation included a history, self-administration of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire, physical examination and the Meares-Stamey test to exclude genital tract infection. The initial 40 patients received 10 mg. paroxetine daily for 21 days and then 20 mg. as needed, that is 3 to 4 hours before planned sexual activity, for 6 months (group 1). The other group of 40 men received 10 mg. paroxetine daily for 21 days and then 20 mg. as needed plus 50 mg. sildenafil as needed, that is 1 hour before planned sexual activity, for 6 months (group 2). Patients were followed 3 and 6 months after beginning therapy and were evaluated using several general assessment questions, IIEF and ejaculatory latency time. RESULTS: Mean ejaculatory latency time +/- SE in group 1 was 0.33 +/- 0.04, 3.7 +/- 0.10 (p <0.01) and 4.2 +/- 0.03 (p <0.01) minutes at baseline, 3 and 6-month followup, while in group 2 it was 0.35 +/- 0.03, 4.5 +/- 0.07 (p <0.01) and 5.3 +/- 0.02 (p <0.001) minutes, respectively. When improvement in ejaculatory latency time was compared in the 2 groups, group 2 results proved to be significantly greater (p <0.05). Baseline, and 3 and 6-month mean intercourse satisfaction domain values of the IIEF were 9, 11 and 11 (p = 0.09, not significant), and 9, 11 and 14 (p <0.05) in groups 1 and 2, respectively. Group 2 patients reported significantly greater intercourse satisfaction than those in group 1 (p <0.05). At baseline, 3 and 6 months there was a mean of 0.9 +/- 0.1, 1.7 +/- 0.3 (not significant) and 2.5 +/- 0.3 (p <0.01) coitus episodes weekly in group 1, and 1 +/- 0.2, 2.3 +/- 0.3 (p <0.01) and 3.2 +/- 0.1 (p <0.001) in group 2, respectively. Group 2 patients reported a significantly higher number of coitus episodes weekly (p <0.05). Side effects in the 40 group 1 cases included anejaculation in 1 (2.5%), gastrointestinal upset and/or nausea in 5 (12.5%), headache in 4 (10%) and decreased libido in 2 (5%). Side effects in the 40 group 2 cases included anejaculation in 1 (2.5%), headache in 8 (20%), gastrointestinal upset and/or nausea in 6 (15%) and flushing in 6 (15%). Group 2 patients reported significantly more headaches (p <0.01) and flushing episodes (p <0.001) than those in group 1. After 6 months of treatment 33 men (82.5%) in group 1 and 36 (90%) in group 2 were willing to continue therapy (not significant). CONCLUSIONS: Paroxetine combined with sildenafil appears to provide significantly better results in terms of ejaculatory latency time and intercourse satisfaction versus paroxetine alone in potent patients with premature ejaculation. However, combined treatment is associated with a mild increase in drug related side effects.