Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection at Radical Prostatectomy for Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer: Assessing Utility and Nodal Metastases Within a Statewide Quality Improvement Consortium.

OBJECTIVE: To assess which patients with intermediate-risk PCa would benefit from a pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) across the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative, given the discrepancy in recommendations. AUA guidelines for localized prostate cancer (PCa) state that PLND is indicated for patients with unfavorable intermediate-risk and high-risk PCa and can be considered in favorable intermediate-risk patients. NCCN guidelines recommend PLND when risk for nodal disease is ≥2%. METHODS: Data regarding all robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) (March 2012-October 2020) were prospectively collected, including patient, and surgeon characteristics. Univariate and multivariate analyses of PLND rate and lymph node involvement (LN+) were performed. RESULTS: Among 8,591 men undergoing RARP for intermediate-risk PCa, 80.2% were performed with PLND (n = 6883), of which 2.9% were LN+ (n = 198). According to the current AUA risk stratification system, 1.2% of favorable intermediate-risk PCa and 4.7% of unfavorable intermediate-risk PCa demonstrated LN+. There were also differences in the LN+ rates among the subgroups of favorable (0.0%-1.3%), and unfavorable (3.5%-5.0%) categories. Additional factors associated with higher LN+ rates include ≥50% cores positive, ≥35% involvement at any core, and unfavorable genomic classifier result, none of which contribute to the favorable/unfavorable subgroups. CONCLUSION: These data support PLND at RARP for all patients with unfavorable intermediate-risk PCa. Our data also indicate patients with favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer at greatest risk for LN+ are those with ≥50% cores positive, ≥35% involvement at any core, and/or unfavorable genomic classifier result.

Comparison of Side Effects and Tolerability Between Intravesical Bacillus Calmette-Guerin, Reduced-Dose BCG and Gemcitabine for Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To compare patient-reported side effects and tolerability of full-dose Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG), reduced-dose BCG, and gemcitabine one week after administration. METHODS: All patients from July 2019 to November 2020 receiving intravesical therapy (IVT) for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) at our institution were surveyed before repeat instillation. Survey questions recorded IVT retention times and the duration and severity of the following side effects: bladder symptoms, fatigue, body aches, hematuria, fever, chills, and other. All responses were collected and quantified in a de-identified, password-protected database. Statistical analysis was performed using SAS JMP 13. RESULTS: Of 592 surveys completed, symptoms of any kind were reported on 463 surveys (78%) with the most common symptoms including bladder symptoms (59%), fatigue (52%), body aches (26%), and hematuria (18%). Patients were able to hold full-dose BCG, reduced-dose BCG, and gemcitabine for the protocol-specified duration 87%, 95%, and 71% of the time (P <0.05). The prevalence, severity, and duration of body aches were highest with gemcitabine (P <0.05) while the prevalence and duration of hematuria were higher with BCG (P <0.05). Reduced-dose BCG had the lowest prevalence, severity, and duration of fatigue (P <0.05). CONCLUSION: Significant differences in the side effects and tolerability of full-dose BCG, reduced-dose BCG, and gemcitabine were demonstrated using this novel survey, and these differences are of value for informing IVT selection. Evaluation of IVTs other than gemcitabine and BCG will further inform selection of therapies for NMIBC.

Surgical management of a large retroperitoneal liposarcoma: A case study.

The patient was a 45-year-old male who initially presented with a left hydrocele. During radiographic work-up, a 26 cm right retroperitoneal lipoma was incidentally discovered. Despite a recommendation for preoperative radiation therapy followed by surgery from the sarcoma multispecialty team, the patient opted for surgery alone, in the hopes of avoiding damage or loss of his right kidney. Following surgical excision of the 39 cm well-differentiated liposarcoma, with removal of the perinephric fat adjacent to the tumor thereby preserving the kidney, he was discharged home after two nights in the hospital. Follow-up imaging eight months later showed no recurrence.

Rectourethral fistula following SpaceOAR gel placement for prostate cancer radiotherapy: A rare complication.

After undergoing a SpaceOAR® gel placement prior to planned radiotherapy for Gleason 4 + 4 prostate cancer, a 70-year-old male experienced severe right buttock pain and urine passing from his rectum. A colonoscopy and follow-up pelvic MRI demonstrated a large rectourethral fistula. The fistula was treated surgically with a robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, primary rectal repair, omental flap and diverting loop ileostomy. Pathology demonstrated extensive treatment effect with no residual prostate cancer. This is the first case study of a rectourethral fistula attributable to SpaceOAR® gel placement.

Management of prostate cancer after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate.

INTRODUCTION: Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is effective in treating lower urinary tract symptoms from prostatic disease. We investigate the role of HoLEP in the management of patients with benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH) and prostate cancer (CaP). METHODS: Retrospective review of data regarding all patients undergoing HoLEP at a single institution was performed. Pre- and postoperative PSA, multiparametric MRI, and pathology results were analyzed for those with CaP identified prior to or incidentally at HoLEP. RESULTS: From February 2016 to February 2020, 201 patients underwent HoLEP. Twelve patients had CaP diagnosed before HoLEP: 6 patients with GG1 are on active surveillance (AS), 3 of 4 intermediate-risk patients are on AS and 1 received treatment for disease progression, and both high-risk CaP patients achieved symptomatic benefit from HoLEP and are receiving systemic therapy for CaP. Twenty-one patients (11.1%) with incidentally detected CaP at HoLEP remain on AS or watchful waiting based on clinical scenario. CONCLUSION: Screening for CaP in HoLEP candidates with PSA and MRI is recommended given that >10% will have incidental CaP. After HoLEP for BPH/LUTS, patients with CaP can be surveilled with PSA and/or MRI. Further investigation is warranted to determine the durability of success of these approaches.