The impact of 5-ARI on perioperative and functional outcomes of GreenLight PVP: an analysis of the Global GreenLight Group database.

INTRODUCTION: In this study, we sought to investigate the impact of 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5-ARI) on the perioperative and functional outcomes of 180-Watt XPS GreenLight photovaporization of the prostate (PVP) using a large international database. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were obtained from the Global GreenLight Group (GGG) database, which includes eight high-volume, experienced surgeons from seven international centers.  All men with established benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with known 5-ARI status who underwent GreenLight PVP using the XPS-180W system between 2011 and 2019 were eligible for the study.  Patients were assigned to two groups based on the preoperative use of 5-ARI.  Analyses were adjusted for patient age, prostate volume, and American Society of Anesthesia (ASA) score. RESULTS: We included 3,500 men, of which 1,246 (36%) had preoperative 5-ARI use.  Patients in both groups were similar with regards to age and prostate size.  On multivariable analysis, total operative time was slightly shorter (-3.26 min 95% CI: 1.20 - 5.32, p < 0.01) and required 35.6kJ less laser energy (95% CI: -48.0kJ - -23.3kJ, p < 0.01) for patients on 5ARI compared to those without 5-ARI.  However, no clinically significant difference was appreciated regarding postoperative transfusion rates [OR 0.048 (95% CI -0.82-0.91; p = 0.91)], hematuria rates [OR 0.96 (95% CI 0.72-1.3; p = 0.81)], 30-day readmission rates [OR 0.98 (95% CI 0.71-1.4; p = 0.90)], or overall functional outcomes. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that preoperative 5-ARI is not associated with any clinically significant different perioperative or functional outcomes for GreenLight PVP using the XPS-180W system.  There is no role for the initiation or discontinuation of 5-ARI prior to GreenLight PVP.

Safety and efficacy of GreenLight PVP in octogenarians: evaluation of the Global GreenLight Group database.

INTRODUCTION: The present study analyzes the largest international GreenLight database, the Global GreenLight Group (GGG), to evaluate the functional and safety profile of GreenLight photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) in octogenarians. METHODS: The GGG is a database comprised of patients that underwent GreenLight PVP from 2011 to 2019 performed by 8 experienced urologists at 7 international hospitals. Patients 80 years or older at the time of surgery were categorized as octogenarians. They were compared to a similar group of PVP patients below the age of 80. RESULTS: Among 3,648 patients, 586 men were above the age of 80. Compared to patients under the age of 80, octogenarians had larger prostates (76.0 vs 71.9 ml, p = 0.02) and a lower BMI (25.6 vs 26.7, p = 0.045). Operative time was not significantly longer in octogenarians. The improvement in functional outcomes between 80-year-old patients and control patients was not significantly different at one-year follow-up, with the exception of maximum urinary flow (Qmax) that favoured younger patients (10.3 vs 12.6 ml/s, p = 0.02). The odds of transfusion were greater for older patients [OR 8.2 (95% CI 3.6-18.9, p < 0.01)], but they were not at increased risk of hematuria. Octogenarians had higher readmission rates (23.0 vs 11.9%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: GreenLight PVP is a safe option in well-selected octogenarians in a cohort of patients treated by surgeons experienced with the technology. The odds of transfusion were higher in patients over 80, but the absolute risk remains low. The 30-day hospital readmission rate was higher in octogenarians.

Functional outcomes of GreenLight 180-W photoselective vaporization in patients with large (≥ 80 cc) prostates: an analysis of over 3000 men in the Global Greenlight Group (GGG) database.

INTRODUCTION: GreenLight photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) has gained widespread adoption as an option to traditional transurethral resection of the prostate. Prior reports expressed concern with the use of PVP in large prostates. The aim of this study was to investigate the adjusted outcomes of GreenLight PVP in men with large (≥ 80 cc) vs. small prostates (< 80 cc). METHODS: Data were obtained from the Global Greenlight Group which pools data from 7 high volume centers. Men with established benign prostatic hyperplasia who underwent GreenLight PVP using the XPS-180 W system between 2011 and 2019 were eligible and assigned into two groups based on their prostate size (≥ 80 and < 80 cc). 11 functional and perioperative covariates were collected. Analyses were adjusted for patient age and presence of median lobe. RESULTS: 3426 men met the inclusion criteria. 34.6% (n = 1187) of patients had a large prostate size. Baseline age and prostate volume were significantly different between the groups. The magnitude of absolute improvement in unadjusted international prostate symptom score was significantly greater in the large (≥ 80 cc) prostate group at 12 months, with an absolute change of 19.17 points (95% CI 18.46-19.88; p < 0.01). There was also a significant drop in PVR at both 6- (p = 0.007) and 12 months (p = 0.005). There were no significant differences in transfusion (p = 0.42), hematuria (p = 0.80), or 30-day readmission rates (p = 0.28). CONCLUSIONS: Greenlight PVP is a safe and effective alternative for patients with prostate sizes ≥ 80 cc, with durable outcomes relatively independent from prostate size.

GreenLight photovaporization of the prostate in high-medical-risk patients: an analysis of the Global GreenLight Group (GGG) database.

PURPOSE: We sought to characterize the adjusted outcomes of GreenLight photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) in high-medical-risk (HMR) patients using data from the largest international database. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Global GreenLight Group (GGG) database which pools data of eight high-volume, experienced surgeons, from a total of seven international centers. Eligible study participants underwent GreenLight PVP using the XPS-180 W system between 2011 and 2019. HMR patients were defined as patients with ASA III or greater and were compared to non-HMR patients. Analyses were adjusted for patient age and prostate volume. RESULTS: In the HMR group, patients on average were older and had smaller prostates than the non-HMR control group. Compared to non-HMR patients, transfusions occurred more frequently (2.6% vs. 0.14%, p < 0.01) and the odds of readmission were elevated [OR 2.0, (95% CI 1.4-2.8, p < 0.01)] among HMR patients. Twelve months postoperatively, HMR patients experience greater improvement in QoL than the control group [+ 0.54 (95% CI 0.07-1.0, p = 0.02)]. PVR also decreased 93.1 ml more in HMR than in non-HMR patients after 12 months (95% CI 33.6-152.6, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: We found that GreenLight PVP is safe and effective in improving functional outcomes in higher-risk patients with severe systemic disease compared to their lower-risk counterparts. Though absolute risks remain low, GreenLight PVP is associated with higher odds of transfusion and readmission in the high-risk cohort. The findings of our study reaffirm current guidelines that propose PVP as a viable treatment option for HMR patients.

A non-inferiority comparative analysis of micro-ultrasonography and MRI-targeted biopsy in men at risk of prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-directed and micro-ultrasonography (micro-US)-directed biopsy for detecting clinically significant (Grade Group >1) prostate cancer (csPCa). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 203 patients were prospectively enrolled at three institutions across Germany and Austria in the period from January 2019 to December 2019. During each biopsy, the urologist was blinded to the mpMRI report until after the micro-US targets had been assessed. After unblinding, targets were then sampled using software-assisted fusion, followed by systematic samples. The primary outcome measure was non-inferiority of micro-US to detect csPCa, with a detection ratio of at least 80% that of mpMRI. RESULTS: A total of 79 csPCa cases were detected overall (39%). Micro-US-targeted biopsy detected 58/79 cases (73%), while mpMRI-targeted biopsy detected 60/79 (76%) and non-targeted (completion sampling) samples detected 45/79 cases (57%). mpMRI-targeted samples alone detected 7/79 (9%) csPCa cases which were missed by micro-US-targeted and non-targeted samples. Three of these seven were anterior lesions with 2/7 in the transition zone. Micro-US-targeted samples alone detected 5/79 (6%) and completion sampling alone detected 4/79 cases (5%). Micro-US was non-inferior to mpMRI and detected 97% of the csPCa cases detected by mpMRI-targeted biopsy (95% CI 80-116%; P = 0.023). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first multicentre prospective study comparing micro-US-targeted biopsy with mpMRI-targeted biopsy. The study provides further evidence that micro-US can reliably detect cancer lesions and suggests that micro-US biopsy might be as effective as mpMRI for detection of csPCA. This result has significant implications for increasing accessibility, reducing costs and expediting diagnosis.

Impact of the presence of a median lobe on functional outcomes of greenlight photovaporization of the prostate (PVP): an analysis of the Global Greenlight Group (GGG) Database.

OBJECTIVES: Previous analyses of the impact of median lobe presence on Greenlight photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) outcomes were limited by their small sample size and the ability to adjust for important confounders. As such, we sought to investigate the impact of prostate median lobe presence on the operative outcomes of 180 W XPS GreenLight PVP using a large international database. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Global GreenLight Group (GGG) database which pools data of eight high-volume, experienced surgeons, from a total of seven international centers. All men with established benign prostatic hyperplasia who underwent GreenLight PVP using the XPS-180 W system between 2011 and 2019 were eligible for the study. Patients were assigned to two groups based on presence or absence of median lobes. Analyses were adjusted for patient age, prostate volume, body mass index, and American Society of Anesthesia (ASA) score. RESULTS: A total of 1650 men met the inclusion criteria. A median lobe was identified in 621 (37.6%) patients. Baseline prostate volume, patient age, and ASA score varied considerably between the two groups. In adjusted analyses, the operative and lasing time of patients with median lobes was 6.72 (95% CI 3.22-10.23; p < 0.01) minutes and 2.90 (95% CI 1.02-4.78; p < 0.01) minutes longer than the control group. Men with median lobes had similar postoperative functional outcomes to those without a median lobe except for a 1.59-point greater drop in the 12-month IPSS score compared to baseline (95% CI 0.11-3.08; p = 0.04) in the median lobe group, and a decrease in PVR after 6 months which was 46.51 ml (95% CI 4.65-88.36; p = 0.03) greater in patients with median lobes compared to men without median lobes. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the presence of a median lobe has no clinically significant impact on procedural or postoperative outcomes for patients undergoing Greenlight PVP using the XPS-180 W system.

Validation of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for the Detection of Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: The second version of the PI-RADS™ (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System) was introduced in 2015 to standardize the interpretation and reporting of prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Recently low cancer detection rates were reported for PI-RADS version 2 category 4 lesions. Therefore the aim of the study was to evaluate the cancer detection rate of PI-RADS version 2 in a large prospective cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 704 consecutive men with primary or prior negative biopsies who underwent magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided targeted biopsy and 10-core systematic prostate biopsy between September 2015 and May 2017. All lesions were rated according to PI-RADS version 2 and lesions with PI-RADS version 2 category 3 or greater were biopsied. An ISUP (International Society of Urological Pathology) score of 2 or greater (ie Gleason 3 + 4 or greater) was defined as clinically significant prostate cancer. RESULTS: The overall cancer detection rate of PI-RADS version 2 categories 3, 4 and 5 was 39%, 72% and 91% for all prostate cancer, and 23%, 49% and 77% for all clinically significant prostate cancer, respectively. If only targeted biopsy had been performed, 59 clinically significant tumors (16%) would have been missed. The PI-RADS version 2 score was significantly associated with the presence of prostate cancer (p <0.001), the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer (p <0.001) and the ISUP grade (p <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PI-RADS version 2 is significantly associated with the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer. The cancer detection rate of PI-RADS version 2 category 4 lesions was considerably higher than previously reported. When performing targeted biopsy, the combination with systematic biopsy still provides the highest detection of clinically significant prostate cancer.