Prostatic Artery Embolization in Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer: A Prospective Single Center Pilot Study.

PURPOSE: To assess efficacy and safety of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) in patients with advanced prostate cancer (PCa). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective single-center, single-arm, pilot study, 9 men with advanced PCa underwent PAE. PAE was performed with the use of 250-400 µm Embozene microspheres (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts, USA). International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS), urinary peak flow (Qmax) and post-void residual urine volume (PVR) was assessed at 12 weeks and up to 12 months. Changes in total prostate volume (TPV) and tumor responses by PSA, changes in tumor volume and evaluation of tumor regression by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging were assessed at 12 weeks after PAE. RESULTS: IPSS reduction in median 6 points (0-19) and a significant decrease in PVR from median 70 (20-600) mL to 10 (0-280) mL could be achieved within 12 weeks after PAE. Median TPV and tumor volumes (TV) increased slightly from 19.7 (6.4-110.8) mL to 23.4 (2.4-66.3) mL and 6.4 (4.6-18.3) mL to 8.1 (2.4-25.6) mL at a median of 12 weeks after the procedure. Significant tumor necrosis (≥ 50%) was found in one patient. Eight patients showed > 50% of viable tumor on post-PAE MRI according to MRI. Only one Clavien-Dindo Grade 1 adverse event related to PAE occurred. CONCLUSIONS: PAE with the use of 250-400 µm microspheres is feasible, safe and effective in some patients with advanced PCa regarding functional outcomes. A cytoreductive effect might be achieved in individual patients but must be further assessed. TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT03457805.

[Robot-assisted Simple Prostatectomy (RASP)]. / Laparoskopisch roboterassistierte Adenomenukleation der Prostata.

Robot-assisted Simple Prostatectomy (RASP) Abstract: Surgical treatment of large adenomas of the prostate (> 80g) in men suffering from symptomatic prostate hyperplasia is challenging. Transurethral resection of the prostate (TUR-P), known as the operative gold standard, is not a safe option in large adenomas due to prolonged resection time and the consecutive increased complication rate. For decades, large adenomas were surgically treated by open enucleation. Although the procedure has still its role in surgical treatment of large glands, the perioperative morbidity and complications can be severe. In view of this fact, several new and minimal invasive techniques such as transurethral procedures, mainly using laser technologies (Holmiun-Laser Enucleation, HoLEP and KTP-Laser vaporization, Greenlight™ Laser), have been invented. In addition, the traditional open enucleation of the prostate was performed and evaluated by using conventional laparoscopy and finally by robot-assisted laparoscopy. Meanwhile robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) and especially its modification with an extraperitoneal extravesical access and intraprostatic reconstruction of the prostatic urethra in order to exclude the prostatic wound bed from the urinary tract with consecutive lower perioperative complication rates are well established procedures to treat large adenomas.

Ventral-inlay buccal mucosal graft urethroplasty in a 44-year old female patient with recurrent urethral stricture.

Female urethral stricture is a rare manifestation of bladder outlet obstruction in women. According to the current guidelines of the European Association of Urology, urethral dilatation should be offered as first line treatment. Intermittent self-dilatation (ISD) in case of recurrence is recommended. However, if patients wish definitive surgical treatment or are not able to perform ISD, urethroplasty can be considered. So far, there are little data available on urethroplasty in female patients. We present a case of a 44-year old female patient with a postoperative urethral stricture who underwent ventral-inlay buccal mucosal graft urethroplasty due to inability to perform ISD.

Prostatic Artery Embolization in Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.

CONTEXT: Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) is increasingly performed worldwide for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). In contrast, the role of PAE in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) is unclear. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review summarizes the current available literature on PAE in patients with PCa regarding oncological and functional outcome. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. A structured search for the relevant literature from 1985 to 2022 was performed in Medline, Embase, and York CRD. Risk of bias and confounding assessments were performed using the ROBINS tool. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Thirteen trials (12 case series and one animal study using a canine model) were included in this systematic review. Four studies had a prospective study design. The risk of bias was rated moderate to serious in all the studies. CONCLUSIONS: PAE in patients with PCa seems to be a safe procedure and effective regarding the improvement of LUTS. Despite PAE having been shown to be feasible in different treatment scenarios of localized or advanced PCa, the oncological benefits are debatable due to an unreliable tumor response and a lack of controlled trials including long-term follow-up. PATIENT SUMMARY: We investigated the literature to determine the role of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) in patients with prostate cancer regarding oncological and functional outcomes. The results suggest a similar safety profile and efficacy in terms of functional outcomes to those reported earlier for PAE in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. The role of PAE regarding oncological outcomes has to be assessed further.

Does seminal vesicle-sparing robotic radical prostatectomy influence postoperative prostate-specific antigen measured with an ultrasensitive immunoassay?

PURPOSE Sparing of the seminal vesicles during robotic radical prostatectomy (SVRP) is an attempt to reduce potential damage to the hypogastric pelvic nerves. However, the seminal vesicles are known to express prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and it is unknown whether SVRP influences oncological outcome measured with ultrasensitive PSA immunoassays. In a retrospective study we analysed whether SVRP affects oncological outcome in terms of ultrasensitive PSA nadir and biochemical recurrence as compared with standard robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (sRALP). METHODS Overall, 102 patients underwent robotic prostatectomy. Patients were non-randomly allocated to the following surgical techniques: a SVRP group of 39 patients who underwent robotic radical prostatectomy sparing the tips of the seminal vesicles; a standard group of 63 patients who were treated with sRALP. Inclusion criteria were histologically proven negative margins (R0) and negative lymph node status (pN0). PSA was measured with an ultrasensitive assay. The Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare the differences in PSA nadir and follow-up PSA. Biochemical recurrence was diagnosed if PSA rose to ≥0.2 mg/ml. RESULTS Median (range) follow-up was 31.4 (16.4­43.8) months. Preoperative PSA was 5.8 (0.13­15.29) ng/ml in the SVRP group and 7.1 (0.8­46) ng/ml in the sRALP group. Two cases of biochemical recurrence occurred in the sRALP group during follow-up. One of these two patients presented with locally advanced prostate carcinoma diagnosed from the definitive pathological specimen (pT3b). No patient of the SVRP group had seminal vesicle invasion or biochemical recurrence. No significant between-group difference in terms of PSA nadir and follow-up PSA was recorded. However, the percentage of patients who did not reach PSA nadir values of <0.01 ng/ml was higher in the SVRP group (10 vs 5% in the sRALP group). CONCLUSIONS Compared with sRALP, SVRP had no clinical impact on oncological outcome in terms of PSA nadir or biochemical recurrence measured with an ultrasensitive PSA immunoassay. A slightly higher PSA nadir after SVRP seems to be expected, which needs to be mentioned during follow-up of these patients.