Traditionally, urologists recommend an interval of at least 4 weeks after prostate biopsy before radical prostatectomy. The aim of our study was to evaluate whether the interval from prostate biopsy to radical prostatectomy affects immediate operative outcomes, with a focus on differences in surgical approach. The study population of 1,848 radical prostatectomy patients was divided into two groups according to the surgical approach: open or minimally invasive. Open group included perineal and retropubic approach, and minimally invasive group included laparoscopic and robotic approach. The cut-off of the biopsy-to-surgery interval was 4 weeks. Positive surgical margin status, operative time and estimated blood loss were evaluated as endpoint parameters. In the open group, there were significant differences in operative time and estimated blood loss between the <4-week and > or =4-week interval subgroups, but there was no difference in positive margin rate. In the minimally invasive group, there were no differences in the three outcome parameters between the two subgroups. Multivariate analysis revealed that the biopsy-to-surgery interval was not a significant factor affecting immediate operative outcomes in both open and minimally invasive groups, with the exception of the interval > or =4 weeks as a significant factor decreasing operative time in the minimally invasive group. In conclusion, performing open or minimally invasive radical prostatectomy within 4 weeks of prostate biopsy is feasible for both approaches, and is even beneficial for minimally invasive radical prostatectomy to reduce operative time.
Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/*statistics & numerical data ; *Operative Time ; Postoperative Hemorrhage/*epidemiology ; Prevalence ; Prostatectomy/*statistics & numerical data ; Prostatic Neoplasms/epidemiology/*pathology/*surgery ; Republic of Korea/epidemiology ; Retrospective Studies ; Time-to-Treatment/*statistics & numerical data ; Treatment Outcome

INTRODUCTIONThis study evaluated the data completeness in the registration of prostate cancer after robotic radical prostatectomy (RRP) in the Urological Cancer Registry at the Singapore General Hospital (SGH), and its compliance to the international standards of US Commission on Cancer (CoC).

MATERIALS AND METHODSA certified cancer registrar reviewed all RRP cases between June 2003 and July 2008 in the Urological Cancer Registry at SGH.

RESULTSA total of 365 cases were reviewed. The results showed that 351 (96.2%) of RRP patients' demographic data were captured and 321 (87.9%) of RRP patients were staged. According to the international standards of CoC for an academic institution, the requirement is to capture 100% of all cancer cases and stage at least 90% of them. As for data completeness, 317 (86.7%) of RRP details were captured as compared to the CoC standard requirement of 90%.

CONCLUSIONSThe existing manual cancer registry does not fully meet the CoC standards. Hence, the registry increased sources of case-finding and used active case-finding. With improvements made to the data collection methodology, the number of prostate cancer cases identified has been increased by 52.1% from 215 in 2007 to 327 in 2009. The registry is expected to be fully compliant with the CoC standard with the recruitment of more full time cancer registrars when a new web-based cancer registry is in full operation.

Algorithms ; Data Collection ; methods ; Demography ; Humans ; Male ; Prostatectomy ; instrumentation ; methods ; statistics & numerical data ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; surgery ; Registries ; Research Design ; standards ; Robotics ; Singapore

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to investigate the criteria of biochemical recurrence (BCR) and follow-up periods and methods with and without blood and imaging test of urologic oncology before established guidelines of prostate cancer in Korea. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In December 2015, we sent the questionnaire to urologic oncologist in academic hospital and received the answer from 108 urologic oncologist (50%). Also, we analyzed the data of 1,141 patients underwent radical prostatectomy in 2005 from Korean Medical Insurance. RESULTS: In follow-up, 72 physicians (66.7%) performed blood test every 3 months, 51 physicians (47.2%) performed imaging study in case of BCR. Bone scan was the most common imaging study in the follow-up (74 physicians, 68.5%). But, bone scan was only performed in case of BCR (43 physicians, 39.8%). The criteria of BCR was PSA 0.2 ng/mL (75 physician, 69.4%), 76 physicians (70.4%) was performed different follow-up according to risk of patients. In Korean Medical Insurance data analysis, PSA were performed average 2 times every year and magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, Bone scan were performed average 0.1, 0.2, 0.1 times every year, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The criteria of BCR and the follow-up of prostate cancer patients in Korea were similar Korean prostate cancer guidelines. Blood and imaging test might be increased compared to 10 years ago, it is necessary to compare the Korean Medical Insurance data between 10 years ago and present.
Diagnosis* ; Follow-Up Studies ; Hematologic Tests* ; Humans ; Insurance ; Korea* ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Prostate-Specific Antigen ; Prostatectomy ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; Recurrence* ; Statistics as Topic

Recommendations for managing clinically localized prostate cancer are structured around clinical risk criteria, with prostate biopsy (PB) Gleason score (GS) being the most important factor. Biopsy to radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen upgrading/downgrading is well described, and is often the rationale for costly imaging or genomic studies. We present simple, no-cost analyses of clinical parameters to predict which GS 6 and GS 8 patients will change to GS 7 at prostatectomy. From May 2006 to December 2012, 1590 patients underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). After exclusions, we identified a GS 6 cohort of 374 patients and a GS 8 cohort of 91 patients. During this era, >1000 additional patients were enrolled in an active surveillance (AS) program. For GS 6, 265 (70.9%) of 374 patients were upgraded, and the cohort included 183 (48.9%) patients eligible for AS by the Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance Study (PRIAS) standards, of which 57.9% were upgraded. PB features that predicted a >90% chance of upgrading included ≥ 7 cores positive, maximum foci length ≥ 8 mm in any core, and total tumor involvement ≥ 30%. For GS 8, downgrading occurred in 46 (50.5%), which was significantly higher for single core versus multiple cores (80.4% vs 19.6%, P = 0.011). Biochemical recurrence (BCR) occurred in 3.4% of GS 6 upgraded versus 0% nonupgraded, and in GS 8, 19.6% downgraded versus 42.2% nondowngraded. In counseling men with clinically localized prostate cancer, the odds of GS change should be presented, and certain men with high-volume GS 6 or low-volume GS 8 can be counseled with GS 7-based recommendations.
Biopsy ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Neoplasm Grading/statistics & numerical data* ; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/pathology* ; Prostate/surgery* ; Prostate-Specific Antigen/blood* ; Prostatectomy ; Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery* ; Retrospective Studies ; Sensitivity and Specificity

To evaluate outcomes between extraperitoneal robotic single-port radical prostatectomy (epR-spRP) and extraperitoneal robotic multiport radical prostatectomy (epR-mpRP) performed with the da Vinci Si Surgical System, comparison was performed between 30 single-port (SP group) and 26 multiport (MP group) cases. Comparisons included operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), hospital stay, peritoneal violation, pain scores, scar satisfaction, continence, and erectile function. The median operation time and EBL were not different between the two groups. In the SP group, the median operation time of the first 10 patients was obviously longer than that of the latter 20 patients (P < 0.001). The median postoperative hospital stay in the SP group was shorter than that in the MP group (P < 0.001). The rate of peritoneal damage in the SP group was less than that in the MP group (P = 0.017). The pain score and overall need for pain medications in the SP group were lower than those in the MP group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.015, respectively). Patients in the SP group were more satisfied with their scars than those in the MP group 3 months postoperatively (P = 0.007). At 3 months, the cancer control, recovery of erectile function, and urinary continence rates were similar between the two groups. It is safe and feasible to perform epR-spRP using the da Vinci Si surgical system. Therefore, epR-spRP can be a treatment option for localized prostate cancer. Although epR-spRP still has a learning curve, it has advantages for postoperative pain and self-assessed cosmesis. In the absence of the single-port robotic surgery platform, we can still provide minimally invasive surgery for patients.
Aged ; Blood Loss, Surgical/statistics & numerical data* ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Outcome Assessment, Health Care/statistics & numerical data* ; Perioperative Medicine/statistics & numerical data* ; Prostatectomy/methods* ; Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery* ; Quality Assurance, Health Care/statistics & numerical data* ; Robotic Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data*

PURPOSE: To determine the criteria that can be used to safely reduce unnecessary biopsies for patient found to be lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS)/benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) negative on digital rectal examination (DRE) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS), with a prostate specific antigen (PSA) level over 4.0ng/ml. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective data analysis of 157 patients, with a raised serum PSA level, over 4.0ng/ml, and negative DRE and TRUS findings was performed. The detection rates of prostate cancer according to the prostate volume were also investigated. All patients with one benign biopsy were followed with PSA determination over a 2 year period, and in the cases of men with a persistently elevated PSA, a re-biopsy was suggested. Patients were also classified according to the results of the first biopsy and the follow up PSA level. RESULTS: Of the 157 patients, the rate of prostate cancer was 14.6% (23 of 157), and that for a benign disease, including BPH, was 85.4% (134 of 157). The rates of prostate cancer according to prostate volume (PV) were 20.6 (22 of 107) and 2.0% (1 of 50) in those with a PV80ml, respectively. In the men with one benign biopsy, cancer was not found in 61 (23 with a prostatectomy and 38 with a re-biopsy) and 112/134 (83.6%) had normalized PSA after 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: A statistically significant difference was noted in the profile of a prostate biopsy for cancer according to the prostate volume. We concluded that the majority of LUTS/BPH men with a prostate volume over 80ml have PSA elevation due to BPH or another benign prostate disease, not related to cancer. For patients with negative DRE and TRUS findings, a large prostate (>80ml) and elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA), over 4ng/ml, watchful waiting, with PSA follow up and BPH treatment, may be a suitable option.
Biopsy* ; Digital Rectal Examination ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms ; Male ; Prostate* ; Prostate-Specific Antigen* ; Prostatectomy ; Prostatic Hyperplasia ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; Retrospective Studies ; Statistics as Topic ; Ultrasonography ; Watchful Waiting

Traditional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is a treatment choice in many developing countries and regions for most patients with localized prostate cancer; however, no system for predicting surgical difficulty and risk has been established. This study aimed to propose a simple and standard preoperative classification system of prostate cancer using preoperative data to predict surgical difficulty and risk and to evaluate the relationship between the data and postoperative complications. We collected data from 236 patients and divided them into three groups to evaluate and validate the relationships among preoperative, operative, and postoperative data. This new scoring system is based on the body mass index, ultrasonic prostate volume, preoperative prostate-specific antigen level, middle lobe protrusion, and clinical stage. In the scoring group, we classified 89 patients into two groups: the low-risk group (score of <4) and high-risk group (score of ≥4), and then compared the postoperative data between the two groups. The positive surgical margin rate was higher in the high-risk group than low-risk group. The results in validation Groups A and B were similar to those in the scoring group. The focus of our scoring system is to allow for preliminary assessment of surgical difficulty by collecting the patients' basic information. Urologists can easily use the scoring system to evaluate the surgical difficulty and predict the risks of a positive surgical margin and urinary incontinence in patients undergoing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.
Body Mass Index ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Male ; Neoplasm Staging ; Postoperative Complications/epidemiology* ; Predictive Value of Tests ; Preoperative Period ; Prostate/diagnostic imaging* ; Prostate-Specific Antigen/analysis* ; Prostatectomy/statistics & numerical data* ; Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery* ; Risk Assessment ; Ultrasonography

PURPOSE: To investigate the prevalence and clinical significance of incidental prostate fluoro-2-deoxyglucose (FDG) uptake and to evaluate its impact on patient management. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 47,109 men who underwent FDG positron emission tomography between 2004 and 2014, 1,335 (2.83%) demonstrated incidental FDG uptake in the prostate, with 99 of the latter undergoing prostate biopsy. The primary end point was the histological presence of prostate adenocarcinoma in the biopsy specimen. Outcomes, including treatment methods, survival, and causes of death, were also assessed. Factors associated with the diagnosis of prostate cancer were evaluated by using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Patients with prostate cancer were more likely to have higher serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (p=0.001) and focal FDG uptake (p=0.036) than were those without. Prostate cancer occurred in 1 of 26 patients (3.8%) with serum PSA<2.5 ng/mL, compared with 40 of 67 patients (59.7%) with serum PSA> or =2.5 ng/mL. Multivariable analysis showed that focal lesions (odds ratio [OR], 5.50; p=0.038), age (OR, 1.06; p=0.031), and serum PSA (OR, 1.28; p=0.001) were independent predictors of prostate cancer diagnosis. Most patients with prostate cancer had organ-confined tumors. Of these, 12 (29.3%) underwent radical prostatectomy and 25 (60.9%) received hormone therapy. Of the 11 patients who died, 9 died of primary cancer progression, with only 1 patient dying from prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of incidental FDG uptake in the prostate was not high, although patients with elevated serum PSA had a higher incidence of prostate cancer. Patients with FDG uptake in the prostate should be secondarily evaluated by measuring serum PSA, with those having high serum PSA undergoing prostate biopsy.
*Adenocarcinoma/epidemiology/pathology/surgery ; Aged ; Biopsy ; Fluorodeoxyglucose F18/*pharmacokinetics ; Humans ; Incidental Findings ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Organ Specificity ; Positron-Emission Tomography/*adverse effects ; Prevalence ; *Prostate/drug effects/pathology ; Prostatectomy/methods/statistics & numerical data ; *Prostatic Neoplasms/epidemiology/pathology/surgery ; Radiopharmaceuticals/pharmacokinetics ; Republic of Korea/epidemiology ; Retrospective Studies ; Tissue Distribution

ObjectiveTo determine whether a short interval (≤2 weeks) between 12-core prostate biopsy and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) affects perioperative parameters and the outcome of surgery.

METHODSThis retrospective study included 102 cases of prostate cancer treated by LRP after 12-core prostate biopsy from January 2012 to December 2016. Based on the interval between prostate biopsy and LRP, we divided the patients into three groups: ≤2 wk (n = 35), >2－6 wk (n = 21), and >6 wk (n = 46). The patients averaged 69.87 (59－84) years in age, 24.99 (15.62－33.14) kg/m2 in the body mass index (BMI), 24.41 (0.41－111.78) μg/L in the baseline PSA level, 56.05 (15.97－216.52) ml in the prostate volume, and 7.51 (6－9) in the Gleason score. We analyzed the clinical data, perioperative parameters and outcomes of surgery, and compared them among the three groups of patients.

RESULTSOperations were completed successfully in all the 102 cases without transferring to open surgery. There were no statistically significant differences among the three groups of patients in age, BMI, baseline PSA level, prostate volume, Gleason score, or T stage, nor in the operation time, estimated intraoperative blood loss, blood transfusion rate, intestinal injury, positive incision margin rate, or urinary continence rate at 3 months after surgery.

CONCLUSIONSLaparoscopic radical prostatectomy at ≤2 weeks after 12-core prostate biopsy is safe and effective in the treatment of prostate cancer and does not affect the perioperative parameters and outcomes of surgery.

Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Biopsy ; Blood Loss, Surgical ; Body Mass Index ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Neoplasm Grading ; Operative Time ; Prostate ; pathology ; surgery ; Prostate-Specific Antigen ; Prostatectomy ; methods ; statistics & numerical data ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; pathology ; surgery ; Retrospective Studies ; Time Factors ; Treatment Outcome

With the onset of a metabolic syndrome epidemic and the increasing life expectancy, erectile dysfunction (ED) has become a more common condition. As incidence and prevalence increase, the medical field is focused on providing more appropriate therapies. It is common knowledge that ED is a chronic condition that is also associated with a myriad of other disorders. Conditions such as aging, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, obesity, prostatic hypertrophy, and prostate cancer, among others, have a direct implication on the onset and progression of ED. Characterization and recognition of risk factors may help clinicians recognize and properly treat patients suffering from ED. One of the most reliable treatments for ED is penile prosthetic surgery. Since the introduction of the penile prosthesis (PP) in the early seventies, this surgical procedure has improved the lives of thousands of men, with reliable and satisfactory results. The aim of this review article is to characterize the epidemiology of men undergoing penile prosthetic surgery, with a discussion about the most common conditions involved in the development of ED, and that ultimately drive patients into electing to undergo PP placement.
Diabetes Complications/surgery* ; Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology* ; Erectile Dysfunction/surgery* ; Humans ; Hypertension ; Impotence, Vasculogenic/surgery* ; Male ; Pelvic Bones/injuries* ; Penile Implantation/statistics & numerical data* ; Penile Induration/surgery* ; Penile Prosthesis ; Penis/injuries* ; Prostatectomy/adverse effects* ; Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery* ; Radiation Injuries/surgery* ; Radiotherapy/adverse effects* ; Reoperation ; Spinal Cord Injuries/epidemiology* ; Vascular Diseases/epidemiology* ; Wounds and Injuries/epidemiology*