Refine
Document Type
- Article (38)
Has Fulltext
- yes (38)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (38)
Keywords
- prostate cancer (10)
- radical prostatectomy (8)
- Adenocarcinoma (3)
- HoLEP (3)
- Squamous cell carcinoma (3)
- Variant histology (3)
- chemotherapy (3)
- metastatic prostate cancer (3)
- survival (3)
- systematic biopsy (3)
Institute
- Medizin (38)
The purpose of this narrative review is to discuss and highlight recently published studies regarding the surgical management of patients suffering from prostate cancer treatment complications. Focus will be put on the recalcitrant and more complex cases which might lead to urinary diversion as a definite, last resort treatment. It is in the nature of every treatment, that complications will occur and be bothersome for both patients and physicians. A small percentage of patients following prostate cancer treatment (radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, or other focal therapies) will suffer side effects and thus, will experience a loss of quality of life. These side effects can persist for months and even years. Often, conservative management strategies fail resulting in recalcitrant recurrences. Prostate cancer patients with “end-stage bladder,” “devastated outlet,” or a history of multiple failed interventions, are fortunately rare, but can be highly challenging for both patients and Urologists. In a state of multiple previous surgical procedures and an immense psychological strain for the patient, urinary diversion can offer a definite, last resort surgical solution for this small group of patients. Ideally, they should be transferred to centers with experience in this field and a careful patient selection is needed. As these cases are highly complex, a multidisciplinary approach is often necessary in order to guarantee an improvement of quality of life.
Radiotherapy is a frequently used treatment for prostate cancer. It does not only causes the intended damage to cancer cells, but also affects healthy surrounding tissue. As a result radiation-induced urethral strictures occur in 2.2% of prostate cancer patients. Management of urethral strictures is challenging due to the presence of poor vascularized tissue for reconstruction and the proximity of the sphincter, which can impair the functional outcome. This review provides a literature overview of risk factors, diagnostics and management of radiation-induced urethral strictures.
Introduction: There is still an ongoing debate whether a transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) approach for prostate biopsies is associated with higher (infectious) complications rates compared to transperineal biopsies. This is especially of great interests in settings with elevated frequencies of multidrug resistant organisms (MDRO).
Materials and Methods: Between 01/2018 and 05/2019 230 patients underwent a TRUS-guided prostate biopsy at the department of Urology at University Hospital Frankfurt. Patients were followed up within the clinical routine that was not conducted earlier than 6 weeks after the biopsy. Among 230 biopsies, 180 patients took part in the follow-up. No patients were excluded. Patients were analyzed retrospectively regarding complications, infections and underlying infectious agents or needed interventions.
Results: Of all patients with follow up, 84 patients underwent a systematic biopsy (SB) and 96 a targeted biopsy (TB) after MRI of the prostate with additional SB. 74.8% of the patients were biopsy-naïve. The most frequent objective complications (classified by Clavien-Dindo) lasting longer than one day after biopsy were hematuria (17.9%, n = 32), hematospermia (13.9%, n = 25), rectal bleeding (2.8%, n = 5), and pain (2.2%, n = 4). Besides a known high MDRO prevalence in the Rhine-Main region, only one patient (0.6%) developed fever after biopsy. One patient each (0.6%) consulted a physician due to urinary retention, rectal bleeding or gross hematuria. There were no significant differences in complications seen between SB and SB + TB patients. The rate of patients who consulted a physician was significantly higher for patients with one or more prior biopsies compared to biopsy-naïve patients.
Conclusion: Complications after transrectal prostate biopsies are rare and often self-limiting. Infections were seen in <1% of all patients, regardless of an elevated local prevalence of MDROs. Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIa) were only seen in 3 (1.7%) of the patients. Repeated biopsy is associated with higher complication rates in general.
Objective: To analyze the effect of adverse preoperative patient and tumor characteristics on perioperative outcomes of open (ORP) and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).
Material and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 656 patients who underwent ORP or RARP according to intraoperative blood loss (BL), operation time (OR time), neurovascular bundle preservation (NVBP) and positive surgical margins (PSM). Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify risk factors for impaired perioperative outcomes.
Results: Of all included 619 patients, median age was 66 years. BMI (<25 vs. 25-30 vs. ≥30) had no influence on blood loss. Prostate size >40cc recorded increased BL compared to prostate size ≤ 40cc in patients undergoing ORP (800 vs. 1200 ml, p < 0.001), but not in patients undergoing RARP (300 vs. 300 ml, p = 0.2). Similarly, longer OR time was observed for ORP in prostates >40cc, but not for RARP. Overweight (BMI 25-30) and obese ORP patients (BMI ≥30) showed longer OR time compared to normal weight (BMI <25). Only obese patients, who underwent RARP showed longer OR time compared to normal weight. NVBP was less frequent in obese patients, who underwent ORP, relative to normal weight (25.8% vs. 14.0%, p < 0.01). BMI did not affect NVPB at RARP. No differences in PSM were recorded according to prostate volume or BMI in ORP or RARP. In multivariable analyses, patient characteristics such as prostate volume and BMI was an independent predictor for prolonged OR time. Moreover, tumor characteristics (stage and grade) predicted worse perioperative outcome.
Conclusion: Patients with larger prostates and obese patients undergoing ORP are at risk of higher BL, OR time or non-nervesparing procedure. Conversely, in patients undergoing RARP only obesity is associated with increased OR time. Patients with larger prostates or increased BMI might benefit most from RARP compared to ORP.
Introduction and Objectives: Surgical techniques such as preservation of the full functional-length of the urethral sphincter (FFLU) have a positive impact on postoperative continence rates. Thereby, data on very early continence rates after radical prostatectomy (RP) are scarce. The aim of the present study was to analyze very early continence rates in patients undergoing FFLU during RP.
Materials and Methods: Very early-continence was assessed by using the PAD-test within 24 h after removal of the transurethral catheter. The PAD-test is a validated test that measures the amount of involuntary urine loss while performing predefined physical activities within 1 h (e.g., coughing, walking, climbing stairs). Full continence was defined as a urine loss below 1 g. Mild, moderate, and severe incontinence was defined as urine loss of 1–10 g, 11–50 g, and >50 g, respectively.
Results: 90 patients were prospectively analyzed. Removal of the catheter was performed on the 6th postoperative day. Proportions for no, mild, moderate and severe incontinence were 18.9, 45.5, 20.0, and 15.6%, respectively. In logistic regression younger age was associated with significant better continence (HR 2.52, p = 0.04), while bilateral nerve-sparing (HR 2.56, p = 0.057) and organ-confined tumor (HR 2.22, p = 0.078) showed lower urine loss, although the effect was statistically not significant. In MVA, similar results were recorded.
Conclusion: Overall, 64.4% of patients were continent or suffered only from mild incontinence at 24 h after catheter removal. In general, reduced urine loss was recorded in younger patients, patients with organ-confined tumor and in patients with bilateral nerve sparing. Severe incontinence rates were remarkably low with 15.6%.
Objective: To investigate the value of standard [digital rectal examination (DRE), PSA] and advanced (mpMRI, prostate biopsy) clinical evaluation for prostate cancer (PCa) detection in contemporary patients with clinical bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) scheduled for Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP).
Material and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 397 patients, who were referred to our tertiary care laser center for HoLEP due to BOO between 11/2017 and 07/2020. Of those, 83 (20.7%) underwent further advanced clinical PCa evaluation with mpMRI and/or prostate biopsy due to elevated PSA and/or lowered PSA ratio and/or suspicious DRE. Logistic regression and binary regression tree models were applied to identify PCa in BOO patients.
Results: An mpMRI was conducted in 56 (66%) of 83 patients and revealed PIRADS 4/5 lesions in 14 (25%) patients. Subsequently, a combined systematic randomized and MRI-fusion biopsy was performed in 19 (23%) patients and revealed in PCa detection in four patients (5%). A randomized prostate biopsy was performed in 31 (37%) patients and revealed in PCa detection in three patients (4%). All seven patients (9%) with PCa detection underwent radical prostatectomy with 29% exhibiting non-organ confined disease. Incidental PCa after HoLEP (n = 76) was found in nine patients (12%) with advanced clinical PCa evaluation preoperatively. In univariable logistic regression analyses, PSA, fPSA ratio, and PSA density failed to identify patients with PCa detection. Conversely, patients with a lower International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and PIRADs 4/5 lesion in mpMRI were at higher risk for PCa detection. In multivariable adjusted analyses, PIRADS 4/5 lesions were confirmed as an independent risk factor (OR 9.91, p = 0.04), while IPSS did not reach significance (p = 0.052).
Conclusion: In advanced clinical PCa evaluation mpMRI should be considered in patients with elevated total PSA or low fPSA ratio scheduled for BOO treatment with HoLEP. Patients with low IPSS or PIRADS 4/5 lesions in mpMRI are at highest risk for PCa detection. In patients with a history of two or more sets of negative prostate biopsies, advanced clinical PCa evaluation might be omitted.
Background: Since January 2018 performance of urethroplasties is done on regular basis at the University Hospital Frankfurt (UKF). We aimed to implement and transfer an institutional standardized perioperative algorithm for urethral surgery (established at the University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf—UKE) using a validated Urethral Stricture Surgery Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (USS-PROM) in patients undergoing urethroplasty at UKF. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed all patients who underwent urethroplasty for urethral stricture disease between January 2018 and January 2020 at UKF. All patients were offered to revisit for clinical follow-up (FU) and completion of USS-PROM. Primary end point was stricture recurrence-free survival (RFS). Secondary endpoints were functional outcomes, quality of life (QoL), and patient satisfaction. Results: In total, 50 patients underwent urethroplasty and 74 and 24% had a history of previous urethrotomy or urethroplasty, respectively. A buccal mucosal graft urethroplasty was performed in 86% (n = 43). After patient's exclusion due to lost of FU, FU <3 months, and/or a pending second stage procedure, 40 patients were eligible for final analysis. At median FU of 10 months (interquartile-range 5.0–18.0), RFS was 83%. After successful voiding trial, the postoperative median Qmax significantly improved (24.0 vs. 7.0 mL/s; p < 0.01). Conversely, median residual urine decreased significantly (78 vs. 10 mL; p < 0.01). Overall, 95% of patients stated that QoL improved and 90% were satisfied by the surgical outcome. Conclusions: We demonstrated a successful implementation and transfer of an institutional standardized perioperative algorithm for urethral surgery from one location (UKE) to another (UKF). In our short-term FU, urethroplasty showed excellent RFS, low complication rates, good functional results, improvement of QoL and high patient satisfaction. PROMs allow an objective comparison between different centers.
Objective: To investigate temporal trends in prostate cancer (PCa) radical prostatectomy (RP) candidates.
Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent RP for PCa between January 2014 and December 2019 were identified form our institutional database. Trend analysis and logistic regression models assessed RP trends after stratification of PCa patients according to D'Amico classification and Gleason score. Patients with neoadjuvant androgen deprivation or radiotherapy prior to RP were excluded from the analysis.
Results: Overall, 528 PCa patients that underwent RP were identified. Temporal trend analysis revealed a significant decrease in low-risk PCa patients from 17 to 9% (EAPC: −14.6%, p < 0.05) and GS6 PCa patients from 30 to 14% (EAPC: −17.6%, p < 0.01). This remained significant even after multivariable adjustment [low-risk PCa: (OR): 0.85, p < 0.05 and GS6 PCa: (OR): 0.79, p < 0.001]. Furthermore, a trend toward a higher proportion of intermediate-risk PCa undergoing RP was recorded.
Conclusion: Our results confirm that inverse stage migration represents an ongoing phenomenon in a contemporary RP cohort in a European tertiary care PCa center. Our results demonstrate a significant decrease in the proportion of low-risk and GS6 PCa undergoing RP and a trend toward a higher proportion of intermediate-risk PCa patients undergoing RP. This indicates a more precise patient selection when it comes to selecting suitable candidates for definite surgical treatment with RP.
hintergrund: Männer in Deutschland sterben früher als Frauen und nehmen weniger häufig Krebsvorsorgeuntersuchungen wahr.
Fragestellung: Ziel war die prospektive Evaluation einer „Movember-Gesundheitsinitiative“ am Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt (UKF) im November 2019.
Methoden: Im Rahmen der „Movember-Gesundheitsinitiative“ wurde allen männlichen Mitarbeitern des UKF ab dem 45. Lebensjahr und bei erstgradiger familiärer Vorbelastung eines Prostatakarzinoms ab dem 40. Lebensjahr im November 2019 gemäß S3-Leitlinien der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Urologie (DGU) eine Prostatakarzinom-Vorsorgeuntersuchung angeboten.
Ergebnisse: Insgesamt nahmen 14,4 % der Mitarbeiter teil. Eine familiäre Vorbelastung gaben insgesamt 14,0 % Teilnehmer an. Das mediane Alter betrug 54 Jahre. Der mediane PSA(prostataspezifisches Antigen)-Wert lag bei 0,9 ng/ml, der mediane PSA-Quotient bei 30 %. Bei 5 % (n = 6) zeigte sich ein suspekter Tastbefund in der DRU (digital-rektale Untersuchung). Nach Altersstratifizierung (≤ 50 vs. > 50 Lebensjahre) zeigten sich signifikante Unterschiede im medianen PSA-Wert (0,7 ng/ml vs. 1,0 ng/ml, p < 0,01) und der bereits zuvor durchgeführten urologischen Vorsorge (12,1 vs. 42,0 %, p < 0,01). Vier Teilnehmer (3,3 %) zeigten erhöhte Gesamt-PSA-Werte. Bei 32,2 % der Teilnehmer zeigte sich mindestens ein kontrollbedürftiger Befund. Insgesamt wurden 6 Prostatabiopsien durchgeführt. Hierbei zeigte sich in einem Fall ein intermediate-risk Prostatakarzinom (Gleason 3 + 4, pT3a, pPn1, pNx, R0).
Schlussfolgerungung: Im Rahmen der UKF-Movember-Gesundheitsinitiative 2019 konnten durch ein Vorsorgeangebot 121 Männer für eine Prostatakrebs-Vorsorge inklusive PSA-Testung gewonnen werden. Auffällige/kontrollbedürftige Befunde zeigten sich bei 32,2 %. Bei einem Mitarbeiter wurde ein therapiebedürftiges Prostatakarzinom entdeckt und therapiert.
Background: To evaluate the impact of time to castration resistance (TTCR) in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) patients on overall survival (OS) in the era of combination therapies for mHSPC.
Material and Methods: Of 213 mHSPC patients diagnosed between 01/2013-12/2020 who subsequently developed metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), 204 eligible patients were analyzed after having applied exclusion criteria. mHSPC patients were classified into TTCR <12, 12-18, 18-24, and >24 months and analyzed regarding OS. Moreover, further OS analyses were performed after having developed mCRPC status according to TTCR. Logistic regression models predicted the value of TTCR on OS.
Results: Median follow-up was 34 months. Among 204 mHSPC patients, 41.2% harbored TTCR <12 months, 18.1% for 12-18 months, 15.2% for 18-24 months, and 25.5% for >24 months. Median age was 67 years and median PSA at prostate cancer diagnosis was 61 ng/ml. No differences in patient characteristics were observed (all p>0.05). According to OS, TTCR <12 months patients had the worst OS, followed by TTCR 12-18 months, 18-24 months, and >24 months, in that order (p<0.001). After multivariable adjustment, a 4.07-, 3.31-, and 6.40-fold higher mortality was observed for TTCR 18-24 months, 12-18 months, and <12 months patients, relative to TTCR >24 months (all p<0.05). Conversely, OS after development of mCRPC was not influenced by TTCR stratification (all p>0.05).
Conclusion: Patients with TTCR <12 months are at the highest OS disadvantage in mHSPC. This OS disadvantage persisted even after multivariable adjustment. Interestingly, TTCR stratified analyses did not influence OS in mCRPC patients.
