Minimally invasive surgical therapies (MISTs) for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS): promise or panacea?

ABSTRACT: The increasing importance of treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), while avoiding side effects and maintaining sexual function, has allowed for the development of minimally invasive surgical therapies (MISTs). Recently, the European Association of Urology guidelines reported a paradigm shift from the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) to the management of nonneurogenic male LUTS. The aim of the present review was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the most commonly used MISTs: ablative techniques such as aquablation, prostatic artery embolization, water vapor energy, and transperineal prostate laser ablation, and nonablative techniques such as prostatic urethral lift and temporarily implanted nitinol device (iTIND). MISTs are becoming a new promise, even if clinical trials with longer follow-up are still lacking. Most of them are still under investigation and, to date, only a few options have been given as a recommendation for use. They cannot be considered as standard of care and are not suitable for all patients. Advantages and disadvantages should be underlined, without forgetting our objective: treatment of LUTS and re-treatment avoidance.

Oncological outcomes of whole-gland cryoablation in patients with prostate cancer and high risk of lymph node invasion.

Purpose: Prostate cryoablation has been proposed as an alternative to radical prostatectomy for men with localized prostate cancer (PCa); however, it is limited by the lack of data regarding oncological outcomes and the impossibility of performing a lymph node dissection. The aim of this study was to assess if whole-gland cryoablation is oncologically safe, especially for patients in whom pelvic lymph node dissection would be necessary. Materials and Methods: After institutional review board approval, we identified 102 patients who underwent whole-gland prostate cryoablation between 2013 and April 2019. Lymph node invasion (LNI) probability was computed using Briganti nomogram, and a 5% cutoff probability was used to stratify the population in two groups. Biochemical recurrence after procedure was assessed using Phoenix criteria. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, (CT), and bone scan or choline positron-emission tomography/CT were performed for the detection of distant metastases. Results: Seventeen (17%) patients were treated for a low-risk PCa, 48 (47%) patients were at intermediate-risk PCa, and 37 (36%) patients were at high-risk PCa. Patients with a probability of LNI >5% (n = 46) exhibited higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA), PSA density, ISUP Grade Group, CT stage, and european association of urology (EAU) risk. Recurrence-free survival rates at 3 years' follow-up were 93%, 82%, and 72%, respectively for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients. At a median follow-up of 37 months (17-62), additional treatment and metastasis-free survival were 84% and 97%, respectively. No differences in oncological outcomes were found in patients with a probability of LNI above and below 5%. Conclusions: Prostate whole-gland cryoablation can be considered a safe procedure with acceptable outcomes in low- and intermediate-risk patients. A high preoperative risk of nodal involvement could not be considered an exclusion criterion to perform cryoablation. Further studies are required.

Treatment of localized prostate cancer in elderly patients: the role of partial cryoablation.

PURPOSE: To evaluate oncological outcomes of partial gland cryoablation (PGC) for localized prostate cancer (PCa) in a cohort of elderly patients who required an active treatment. METHODS: Data from 110 consecutive patients treated with PGC for localized PCa were collected. All patients underwent the same standardized follow-up with serum-PSA level and digital rectal examination. Prostate MRI and eventual re-biopsy were performed at twelve months after cryotherapy or in case of suspicion of recurrence. Biochemical recurrence was defined according to Phoenix criteria (PSA nadir + 2 ng/ml). Kaplan-Meier curves and Multivariable Cox Regression analyses were used to predict disease progression, biochemical recurrence- (BCS) and additional treatment-free survival (TFS). RESULTS: Median age was 75 years (IQR 70-79). PGC was performed in 54 (49.1%) patients with low-risk PCa, 42 (38.1%) with intermediate risk and 14 (12.8%) high risk. At a median follow-up of 36 months, we recorded a BCS and TFS of 75 and 81%, respectively. At 5 years, BCS was 68.5% and CRS 71.5%. High-risk prostate cancer was associated with lower TFS and BCS curves when compared with low-risk group (all p values < .03). A PSA reduction < 50% between preoperative level and nadir resulted as an independent failure predictor for all outcomes evaluated (all p values < .01). Age was not associated with worse outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: PGC could be a valid treatment for low- to intermediate PCa in elderly patients, when a curative approach is suitable in terms of life expectancy and quality of life.

Foggia Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator 2.0: A Novel Risk Calculator including MRI and Bladder Outlet Obstruction Parameters to Reduce Unnecessary Biopsies.

Risk calculator (RC) combining PSA with other clinical information can help to better select patients at risk of prostate cancer (PCa) for prostate biopsy. The present study aimed to develop a new Pca RC, including MRI and bladder outlet obstruction parameters (BOOP). The ability of these parameters in predicting PCa and clinically significant PCa (csPCa: ISUP GG ≥ 2) was assessed by binary logistic regression. A total of 728 patients were included from two institutions. Of these, 395 (54.3%) had negative biopsies and 161 (22.11%) and 172 (23.6%) had a diagnosis of ISUP GG1 PCa and csPCa. The two RC ultimately included age, PSA, DRE, prostate volume (pVol), post-voided residual urinary volume (PVR), and PIRADS score. Regarding BOOP, higher prostate volumes (csPCa: OR 0.98, CI 0.97,0.99) and PVR ≥ 50 mL (csPCa: OR 0.27, CI 0.15, 0.47) were protective factors for the diagnosis of any PCa and csPCa. AUCs after internal validation were 0.78 (0.75, 0.82) and 0.82 (0.79, 0.86), respectively. Finally, decision curves analysis demonstrated higher benefit compared to the first-generation calculator and MRI alone. These novel RC based on MRI and BOOP may help to better select patient for prostate biopsy after prostate MRI.

One-Day Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Digital Pathology by Fluorescence Confocal Microscopy.

In this prospective observational study, we tested the feasibility and efficacy of a novel one-day PCa diagnosis path based on biparametric magnetic resonance (bpMRI) and digital pathology by fluorescence confocal microscopy (FCM). Patients aged 55-70 years scheduled for PBx due to increased PSA levels (3-10 ng/mL) and/or abnormal digitorectal examination were enrolled. All patients underwent bpMRI and PBx with immediate FCM evaluation of biopsy cores. Patients were asked to fill out a dedicated Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire. Patients' satisfaction rates and concordance between digital pathology and standard HE evaluation were the outcomes of interest. Twelve patients completed our one-day PCa diagnosis path. BpMRI showed suspicious lesions in 7 patients. Digital pathology by FCM identified PCa in 5 (41.7%) of the 12 patients. Standard pathology confirmed the diagnosis made through digital pathology in all the cases. At a per patient level, high concordance between the methods was achieved in Gleason Grading (4 out of 5 patients). The level of agreement in the number of positive cores was lower but did not affect the choice of treatment in any of the 5 PCa cases. At a per core level, the agreement was very high for the diagnosis of anyPCa (96.2%) and csPCa (97.3%), with a k coefficient of 0.90 and 0.92, respectively (near perfect agreement). In conclusion, one-day PCa diagnosis by FCM represents a feasible, reliable, and fast diagnostic method that provides significant advantages in optimizing time and resources, leading to patients having a higher quality standard of care perception.

Prostate cancer biomarkers: a practical review based on different clinical scenarios.

Traditionally, diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer (PCa) have been based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, digital rectal examination (DRE), and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy. Biomarkers have been introduced into clinical practice to reduce the overdiagnosis and overtreatment of low-grade PCa and increase the success of personalized therapies for high-grade and high-stage PCa. The purpose of this review was to describe available PCa biomarkers and examine their use in clinical practice. A nonsystematic literature review was performed using PubMed and Scopus to retrieve papers related to PCa biomarkers. In addition, we manually searched websites of major urological associations for PCa guidelines to evaluate available evidence and recommendations on the role of biomarkers and their potential contribution to PCa decision-making. In addition to PSA and its derivates, thirteen blood, urine, and tissue biomarkers are mentioned in various PCa guidelines. Retrospective studies have shown their utility in three main clinical scenarios: (1) deciding whether to perform a biopsy, (2) distinguishing patients who require active treatment from those who can benefit from active surveillance, and (3) defining a subset of high-risk PCa patients who can benefit from additional therapies after RP. Several validated PCa biomarkers have become commercially available in recent years. Guidelines now recommend offering these tests in situations in which the assay result, when considered in combination with routine clinical factors, is likely to affect management. However, the lack of direct comparisons and the unproven benefits, in terms of long-term survival and cost-effectiveness, prevent these biomarkers from being integrated into routine clinical use.

Bioptic prostatic inflammation correlates with false positive rates of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this article was to determine the impact of bioptic prostatic inflammation (PI) on the false positive rate of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) in detecting clinically significant prostate ancer (csPCa). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Our prostate biopsy database was queried to identify patients who underwent mp-MRI before PB at our institution. A dedicated uropathologist prospectively assessed bioptic PI using the Irani scores. We evaluated the association between mp-MRI findings, bioptic Gleason grade (GG) and aggressiveness of PI, and PCa detection. RESULTS: In total, 366 men were included. In patients with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) 4-5 lesions, the csPCa (GG ≥2) rate was significantly higher in those with low-grade than in those with high-grade PI (36% vs 29.7%; p = 0.002), and in those with low-aggressive than in those with high-aggressive PI (37.7% vs 30.1%; p = 0.0003). The false positive rates of PIRADS 4-5 lesions for any PCa were 34.2% and 57.8% for low- and high-grade PI, respectively (p = 0.002); similarly, they were 29.5% and 59.4% for mildly and highly-aggressive PI (p = 0.0003). Potential study limitations include its retrospective analysis and single-center study and lack of assessment of the type of PI. CONCLUSIONS: Bioptic PI directly correlates with false positive rates of mp-MRI in detecting csPCa. Clinicians should be aware that PI remains the most common pitfall of mp-MRI.

Intraoperative Digital Analysis of Ablation Margins (DAAM) by Fluorescent Confocal Microscopy to Improve Partial Prostate Gland Cryoablation Outcomes.

Partial gland cryoablation (PGC) aims at destroying prostate cancer (PCa) foci while sparing the unaffected prostate tissue and the functionally relevant structures around the prostate. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) has boosted PGC, but available evidence suggests that ablation margins may be positive due to MRI-invisible lesions. This study aimed at determining the potential role of intraoperative digital analysis of ablation margins (DAAM) by fluoresce confocal microscopy (FCM) of biopsy cores taken during prostate PGC. Ten patients with low to intermediate risk PCa scheduled for PGC were enrolled. After cryo-needles placement, 76 biopsy cores were taken from the ablation margins and stained by the urologist for FCM analysis. Digital images were sent for "real-time" pathology review. DAAM, always completed within the frame of PGC treatment (median time 25 min), pointed out PCa in 1/10 cores taken from 1 patient, thus prompting placement of another cryo-needle to treat this area. Standard HE evaluation confirmed 75 cores to be cancer-free while displayed a GG 4 PCa in 7% of the core positive at FCM. Our data point out that IDAAM is feasible and reliable, thus representing a potentially useful tool to reduce the risk of missing areas of PCa during PGC.

PSA Density Help to Identify Patients With Elevated PSA Due to Prostate Cancer Rather Than Intraprostatic Inflammation: A Prospective Single Center Study.

The association between PSA density, prostate cancer (PCa) and BPH is well established. The aim of the present study was to establish whether PSA density can be used as a reliable parameter to predict csPCa and to determine its optimal cutoff to exclude increased PSA levels due to intraprostatic inflammation. This is a large prospective single-center, observational study evaluating the role of PSA density in the discrimination between intraprostatic inflammation and clinically significant PCa (csPCa). Patients with PSA ≥ 4 ng/ml and/or positive digito-rectal examination (DRE) and scheduled for prostate biopsy were enrolled. Prostatic inflammation (PI) was assessed and graded using the Irani Scores. Multivariable binary logistic regression analysis was used to assess if PSA density was associated with clinically significant PCa (csPCa) rather than prostatic inflammation. A total of 1988 patients met the inclusion criteria. Any PCa and csPCa rates were 47% and 24% respectively. In the group without csPCa, patients with prostatic inflammation had a higher PSA (6.0 vs 5.0 ng/ml; p=0.0003), higher prostate volume (58 vs 52 cc; p<0.0001), were more likely to have a previous negative biopsy (29% vs 21%; p=0.0005) and a negative DRE (70% vs 65%; p=0.023) but no difference in PSA density (0.1 vs 0.11; p=0.2). Conversely in the group with csPCa, patients with prostatic inflammation had a higher prostate volume (43 vs 40 cc; p=0.007) but no difference in the other clinical parameters. At multivariable analysis adjusting for age, biopsy history, DRE and prostate volume, PSA density emerged as a strong predictor of csPCA but was not associated with prostatic inflammation. The optimal cutoffs of PSA density to diagnose csPCa and rule out the presence of prostatic inflammation in patients with an elevated PSA (>4 ng/ml) were 0.10 ng/ml2 in biopsy naïve patients and 0.15 ng/ml2 in patients with a previous negative biopsy. PSA density rather than PSA, should be used to evaluate patients at risk of prostate cancer who may need additional testing or prostate biopsy. This readily available parameter can potentially identify men who do not have PCa but have an elevated PSA secondary to benign conditions.