With the dramatically increasing detection rate of ground-glass nodules (GGN), exact understanding and treatment strategy of them has become the hottest issue currently. More and more studies have begun to explore the underlying mechanisms of their indolent characteristics and favorable prognosis from the perspectives of molecular evolution and immune microenvironment. GGN has different dominating gene mutations at different evolutional stages. The pure GGN has a lower tumor mutation burden and genomic instability, while a gradually evolutionary feature of genomic mutation along with the pathological progression can be observed. GGN has less infiltration of immune cells, and they are under the pressure of immune surveillance with weakened immune escape. With the increase of solid components, an inhibitory immune microenvironment is gradually established and immune escape is gradually enhanced, leading to rapid tumor growth. Further exploration of the molecular characteristics of GGN will help to more precisely distinguish these highly heterogeneous lesions, which could be helpful to make personalized treatment plans.

With the dramatically increasing detection rate of ground-glass nodules (GGN), exact understanding and treatment strategy of them has become the hottest issue currently. More and more studies have begun to explore the underlying mechanisms of their indolent characteristics and favorable prognosis from the perspectives of molecular evolution and immune microenvironment. GGN has different dominating gene mutations at different evolutional stages. The pure GGN has a lower tumor mutation burden and genomic instability, while a gradually evolutionary feature of genomic mutation along with the pathological progression can be observed. GGN has less infiltration of immune cells, and they are under the pressure of immune surveillance with weakened immune escape. With the increase of solid components, an inhibitory immune microenvironment is gradually established and immune escape is gradually enhanced, leading to rapid tumor growth. Further exploration of the molecular characteristics of GGN will help to more precisely distinguish these highly heterogeneous lesions, which could be helpful to make personalized treatment plans.

Objective: To investigate the operating key steps and the initial experience of IUPU (Institute of Urology, Peking University) modified extraperitoneal laparoscopic VIP (Vattikuti institute prostatectomy) technique and the initial follow-up outcomes. Methods: 46 patients of prostate cancer underwent the modified extraperitoneal laparoscopic VIP and were reviewed from November 2017 to September 2018. Patients aged 54 to 77 years, with mean age of 65.5 years old. Their preoperative PSA was 0.15 to 69.76 ng/ml with an average of 13.4 ng/ml. All patients were diagnosed by prostate biopsy and Gleason score was 6 to 10 with an average of 7.5. MRI was used to assess their clinical stage before operation. All the modified laparoscopic VIP were done through the extraperitoneal approach by a single surgeon and the follow-up by telephone for the PSA level and continence recovery (urine pad test). The major differences between modified laparoscopic VIP and the routine steps of radical prostatectomy are as follows: use of extraperitoneal approach and traditional laparoscopic operation; after the setup of the extraperitoneal cavity, the bladder neck is separated, isolated and cut down first; the management of DVC: Cut down the super-facial and deep layers of DVC just along the capsule of the prostate apex and it’s unnecessary to suture it. Perioperative data of these patients were collected retrospectively, including operation time, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, postoperative pathology, and continence outcome after surgery. Result: All 46 patients underwent the IUPU modified extraperitoneal laparoscopic VIP successfully without converting to open surgery. The operation time was 69-143 min with an average of 95.7 min and the estimated blood loss was 20-200 ml with an average of 81.5 ml. It was 3-17 days for the average time to remove the retropubic drainage tube postoperatively, with an average of 4.3 days. The postoperative hospital stay was 3-17 days with an average of 5.3 days. The Foley catheter was removed 14 days postoperatively. Five patients suffered from urine leakage and were managed successfully with conservative treatment. For the postoperative pathological stage, 1 patient was pT_2a, 12 patients were pT_2c, 12 patients were pT_3a and 21 patients were pT_3b. The postoperative Gleason score was 6-9 with an average of 7.7. The postoperative follow-up time was 1-11 months with an average of 6.3 months. The PSA was 0.001-0.966 ng/ml with an average of 0.181 ng/ml 1 month postoperatively and the continence rate was 54%(25/46) and 89%(34/38) 1 month and 3 months after operation respectively. Conclusions The IUPU modified extraperitoneal laparoscopic VIP might be a safe and feasible for the radical prostatectomy. It’s simplified for the operative steps, unnecessary to isolate and suture DVC and doesn’t increase the blood loss. It’s almost left intact for the surrounding tissues of the prostate apex and satisfactory for the early urinary continence. The oncological outcomes are needed to followup further.