Tag Archive for: Article of the Week

You are here: / Article of the Week

Posts

Editorial: New robots – cost, connectivity and artificial intelligence

/by

The amazing Da Vinci system, is about to face some market competition from other international companies with their own versions of next generation robots [1]. In order to challenge the current gold standard, these systems will need to be at least as good if not better. The alternative is to be significantly cheaper thus attracting a wider variety of institutions who could currently not afford the Da Vinci. Open consoles, 3D enhanced vision, lighter instruments and greater portability will be recurring themes in these new systems. There is even some renewed interest in automation that goes back to the days of John Wickham, who passed away just short of his 90th birthday (https://www.bjuinternational.com/bjui-blog/light-years-ahead-john-wickham-1927-2017/). The STAR robot can suture bowel better than a human hand in an animal model [2]. The water jet robot (Procept Biorobotics) takes inspiration from Wickham’s PROBOT and may prove to be a viable alternative to TURP or HOLEP but without the steep learning curve [3].

The Revo-i, a Korean robot, has completed the first clinical testing in 17 patients undergoing Retzius sparing robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). It is an example of real-life reporting where even in experienced hands, three patients underwent blood transfusion and the positive margin rate was 23% [4]. One could speculate whether the approach itself or the adoption of a new robotic system reflected the results of this paper? Either way we can expect to see more such first in man reports over coming years as new robots become available.

These new machines have the potential to reduce the cost of robotic surgery to be similar to that of laparoscopy although the initial hardware outlay may still be substantial. Cambridge Medical Robotics (CMR), UK have plans to introduce competitive cost models which cover maintenance, instruments and even assistants as a comprehensive package. This may make robotics attractive to multidisciplinary expansion, amongst high volume open and laparoscopic surgeons.

The two other aspects in the world of new robots that are causing excitement are artificial intelligence (AI) and faster digital communication. The concept of AI is not new, going back to genius of Alan Turing, who with his decoding skills had a major impact on the outcome of World War II. Machine Learning (ML) is a subset of AI, using decision-making computer algorithms to grasp and respond to specific data, keep your professional devices in good shape with IT services Morristown New Jersey. For example, a prostate recognition algorithm could make the machine learn whether a given image is that of a prostate cancer or not, thus reducing the variability in MRI readings by radiologists. The video recordings of surgeons performing RARP can now be converted through a “black box” into Automated Performance Metrics (APMs) and demonstrate paradoxical findings in that not all high volume surgeons are necessarily those with the best outcomes [5]. With Google moving into surgical robotics in collaboration with J&J, data capture and ML are likely to hold promise for the future.

The UK government amongst others has declared significant investment of > £1billion in AI, with a view to engaging with new talent and remaining a world leader in this emerging field. Led by Dame Wendy Hall (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/growing-the-artificial-intelligence-industry-in-the-uk) this ambitious project outlines a vision of appointing new researchers from the UK and overseas in all forms of AI, while maintaining the sensitivities around data trust and ethics. However, a word of caution in that AI faces difficulty with reproducibility as a result of unpublished codes in over 90% of articles written on the subject [6].

Surgery may be further democratised in coming years with the advent of low latency ultrafast 5G connectivity. The Internet of Skills could make remote robotic surgery and mentorship easily accessible, irrespective of the location of the expert surgeon [7]. The impact of these developments on patient care will be of considerable interest to the wider surgical community.

Prokar Dasgupta FKC, Editor-in-Chief BJUI

MRC Centre for Transplantation, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, King’s College London, UK

 

References

  1. Rassweiler JJ, Autorino R, Klein J et al. Future of robotic surgery in urology. BJU Int 2017; 120: 822-841. doi:10.1111/bju.13851
  2. Shademan A, Decker RS, Opfermann JD, Leonard S, Krieger A, Kim PC. Supervised autonomous robotic soft tissue surgery. Sci Transl Med 2016;8:337ra64
  3. Gilling P, Reuther R, Kahokehr A, Fraundorfer M. Aquablation – image‐guided robot‐assisted waterjet ablation of the prostate: initial clinical experience. BJU Int 2016; 117: 923-9.
  4. Chang KD, Abdel Raheem A, Choi Y D, Chung BH, Rha KH. Retzius‐sparing robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy using the Revo‐i robotic surgical system: surgical technique and results of the first human trial. BJU Int 2018; 122: 441-448
  5. Chen J, Oh PJ, Cheng N, Shah A, Montez J, Jarc A, Guo L, Gill IS, Hung AJ. Utilization of automated performance metrics to measure surgeon performance during robotic vesicourethral anastomosis and methodical development of a training tutorial. J Urol. 2018 May 21. pii: S0022-5347(18)43237-5. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2018.05.080. [Epub ahead of print] PMID: 29792882
  6. Hutson M. Artificial intelligence faces reproducibility crisis. Science 16 Feb 2018: Vol. 359, Issue 6377, pp. 725-726
  7. Kim SS, Dohler M, Dasgupta P. The Internet of Skills: use of fifth‐generation telecommunications, haptics and artificial intelligence in robotic surgery. BJU Int 2018; 122: 356-359

 

Article of the Month: Retzius-sparing RARP using the Revo-i: results of the first human trial

/by

Every Month, the Editor-in-Chief selects an Article of the Month from the current issue of BJUI. The abstract is reproduced below and you can click on the button to read the full article, which is freely available to all readers for at least 30 days from the time of this post.

In addition to the article itself, there is an accompanying editorial written by a prominent member of the urological community. This blog is intended to provoke comment and discussion and we invite you to use the comment tools at the bottom of each post to join the conversation.

If you only have time to read one article this week, it should be this one.

Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy using the Revo-i robotic surgical system: surgical technique and results of the first human trial

 

Ki Don Chang*†, Ali Abdel Raheem*‡, Young Deuk Choi* , Byung Ha Chung* and Koon Ho Rha*

*Department of Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, †Department of Urology, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei Wonju University College of Medicine, Wonju, Korea, and ‡Department of Urology, Tanta University Medical School, Tanta, Egypt

Read the full article

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the safety and proficiency of the Revo‐i® robotic platform (Meere Company Inc.) in the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa).

Patients and Methods

A prospective study was carried out on 17 patients with clinically localized PCa treated between 17 August 2016 and 23 February 2017 at our urology department using the Revo‐i. Patients underwent Retzius‐sparing robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy (RS‐RARP). The primary objective was to describe the RS‐RARP step‐by‐step surgical technique using the Revo‐i. In addition, the safety of the Revo‐i was assessed according to intra‐operative and the postoperative complications within 30 days of surgery. Early oncological outcomes were also assessed according to surgical margin status and biochemical recurrence (BCR). Continence was defined as use of no or only one pad. Surgeons’ satisfaction with the Revo‐i was assessed using the Likert scale.

Results

All surgeries were completed successfully, with no conversion to open or laparoscopic surgery. The median patient age was 72 years. The median docking time, console time, urethrovesical anastomosis time and estimated blood loss were 8 min, 92 min, 26 min and 200 mL, respectively. One patient was transfused intra‐operatively as a result of blood loss of 1 500 mL. Postoperatively, two patients received blood transfusion, and there were no other serious/major complications. The median hospital stay was 4 days. At 3 months, four patients had positive surgical margins, one patient had BCR, and 15 patients were continent. Most of surgeons were satisfied with the Revo‐i performance.

Conclusions

The first human study for the treatment of patients with localized PCa using the Revo‐i robotic surgical system was carried out successfully. The peri‐operative, early oncological and continence outcomes are encouraging. Further prospective studies are warranted to support our preliminary results.

Read more articles of the week

Video: Retzius-sparing RARP using the Revo-i – results of the first human trial

/by

Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy using the Revo-i robotic surgical system: surgical technique and results of the first human trial

 

Read the full article

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the safety and proficiency of the Revo‐i® robotic platform (Meere Company Inc.) in the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa).

Patients and Methods

A prospective study was carried out on 17 patients with clinically localized PCa treated between 17 August 2016 and 23 February 2017 at our urology department using the Revo‐i. Patients underwent Retzius‐sparing robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy (RS‐RARP). The primary objective was to describe the RS‐RARP step‐by‐step surgical technique using the Revo‐i. In addition, the safety of the Revo‐i was assessed according to intra‐operative and the postoperative complications within 30 days of surgery. Early oncological outcomes were also assessed according to surgical margin status and biochemical recurrence (BCR). Continence was defined as use of no or only one pad. Surgeons’ satisfaction with the Revo‐i was assessed using the Likert scale.

Results

All surgeries were completed successfully, with no conversion to open or laparoscopic surgery. The median patient age was 72 years. The median docking time, console time, urethrovesical anastomosis time and estimated blood loss were 8 min, 92 min, 26 min and 200 mL, respectively. One patient was transfused intra‐operatively as a result of blood loss of 1 500 mL. Postoperatively, two patients received blood transfusion, and there were no other serious/major complications. The median hospital stay was 4 days. At 3 months, four patients had positive surgical margins, one patient had BCR, and 15 patients were continent. Most of surgeons were satisfied with the Revo‐i performance.

Conclusions

The first human study for the treatment of patients with localized PCa using the Revo‐i robotic surgical system was carried out successfully. The peri‐operative, early oncological and continence outcomes are encouraging. Further prospective studies are warranted to support our preliminary results.

View more videos

Editorial: Exercise to prevent LUTS – myth and reality

/by

The pathophysiology of LUTS is one of the most intriguing issues in urology and the conundrum remains unsolved. Their multifactorial origin imposes a differential diagnosis that is often quite straightforward but sometimes complicated and at times the enigma is cracked only ex adiuvantibus. Clinical trials and personal experience have showed us that patients rarely become asymptomatic albeit our therapeutic efforts, suggesting that part of the problem is in the ageing process. So the question comes as to whether we can halt or delay ageing. Clearly some people age without LUTS apart from a physiological decrease in urinary flow. What goes wrong in our patients that stay right in some other subjects? Most of us would like to have a pill that could fix every problem, an easy answer to swallow and remedy our troubles, but this is not always the case.

‘Lifestyle’ is one of the most frequently cited words with 1 330 000 000 on Google today, more than double the ‘hits’ for happiness (a mere 576 000 000). No doubt that behind the lifestyle mantra there is an industry that makes billions on lifestyle issues, but as there is usually ‘no smoke without fire’ there must be something to it. Who has never been advised to change his way of life? Probably none, but who actually takes up the challenge and changes their routine? Clinical trials on the therapeutic effect of lifestyle changes cannot be analysed with an intent‐to‐treat analysis because ‘there’s many a slip ‘twixt cup and lip’ and we need look at those who really undertake the challenge.

There is a growing body of evidence that a healthy lifestyle will not just help to prevent cancer and cardiovascular events or keep you ‘fit’, but will also reduce the risk of developing LUTS [1, 2]. In this issue of the BJUI, a paper from South Korea [3] provides rather convincing evidence that sitting for ≥10 h/day will increase your risk of storage and voiding symptoms, whilst doing exercise will reduce it. But what if you are a manager and your job is to read an endless number of reports each day? You cannot read whilst walking or doing exercise; you work for a living and LUTS may be the price you pay for a wealthier life.

As a surgeon I have an obsession for fixing things and making my patients better. If my patients have a sedentary job can I suggest a change in their lifestyle (not a change of job) that can counterbalance long sitting hours? The answer from the Korean cohort seems to be negative, as multivariate analysis of a subject cohort with long sitting hours suggested an increased risk of developing LUTS notwithstanding some exercise. I never thought that sitting was that bad but ‘est modus in rebus’ as Horace put it and probably sitting for too long is bad. Actually, my watch keeps telling me to stand at regular intervals, although I think I stand for too long in theatre (it also reminds me to breathe properly but that is another story).

This is a long way to say that I would rather be told what I can do right than be told what I am doing wrong. Is my personal risk of a poor outcome reversible? I think we have enough evidence from observational studies that exercise will reduce the risk of developing LUTS, but the time has come to embark on large prospective trials of LUTS treatment with lifestyle changes including exercise.

I have a number of patients who adopted a healthier lifestyle upon retirement (more info here about how they are doing it), lost weight, lowered their arterial pressure and their glucose levels, and their LUTS improved dramatically. What I need to know is whether this is the exception or whether this is the rule. These are not easy studies but I would rather work to answer an important academic question with a difficult and long‐term trial rather than doing an easier study that will not change the way we live and the way we practise.

Andrea Tubaro and Cosimo De Nunzio
Department of Urology, Sant’Andrea Hospital, Rome, Italy
Read the full article

References

  1. De Nunzio C, Presicce F, Lombardo R et al. Physical activity as a risk factor for prostate cancer diagnosis: a prospective biopsy cohort analysis. BJU Int 2016; 117: E29–35
  2. Gacci M, Corona G, Sebastianelli A et al. Male lower urinary tract symptoms and cardiovascular events: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Eur Urol 2016; 70: 788–96
  3. Park HJ, Park CH, Chang Y, Ryu S. Sitting time, physical activity and the risk of lower urinary tract symptoms: a cohort study. BJU Int 2018; 122: 293–99

Article of the Week: Sitting time, physical activity and the risk of LUTS

/by

Every Week, the Editor-in-Chief selects an Article of the Week from the current issue of BJUI. The abstract is reproduced below and you can click on the button to read the full article, which is freely available to all readers for at least 30 days from the time of this post.

In addition to the article itself, there is an accompanying editorial written by a prominent member of the urological community. This blog is intended to provoke comment and discussion and we invite you to use the comment tools at the bottom of each post to join the conversation.

If you only have time to read one article this week, it should be this one.

Sitting time, physical activity and the risk of lower urinary tract symptoms: a cohort study

Heung Jae Park*, Chang Hoo Park†, Yoosoo Chang‡§¶ and Seungho Ryu‡§¶

 

*Department of Urology, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea, †Department of Urology, School of Medicine, Gangneung Asan Hospital, Ulsan University, Gangneung, South Korea, ‡Centre for Cohort Studies, Total Healthcare Centre, §Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea, and Department of Clinical Research Design & Evaluation, SAIHST, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, South Korea

 

Read the full article

Abstract

Objectives

To examine the association of sitting time and physical activity level with the incidence of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in a large sample of Korean men.

Materials and Methods

A cohort study was performed in 69 795 Korean men, free of LUTS at baseline, who were followed up annually or biennially for a mean of 2.6 years. Physical activity level and sitting time were assessed using the validated Korean version of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire Short Form. LUTS were assessed using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and clinically significant LUTS were defined as an IPSS score ≥8.

Results

Over 175 810.4 person‐years, 9 217 people developed significant LUTS (incidence rate, 39.0 per 1 000 person‐years). In a multivariable‐adjusted model, both low physical activity level and prolonged sitting time were independently associated with the incidence of LUTS. The hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals [CIs]) for incident LUTS comparing minimally active and health‐enhancing physically active groups vs the inactive group were 0.94 (95% CI 0.89–0.99) and 0.93 (95% CI 0.87–0.99), respectively (P for trend 0.011). The hazard ratios (95% CIs) for LUTS comparing 5–9 and ≥10 h/day sitting time vs <5 h/day were 1.08 (95% CI 1.00–1.24) and 1.15 (95% CI 1.06–1.24), respectively (P for trend <0.001).

Conclusions

Prolonged sitting time and low physical activity levels were positively associated with the development of LUTS in a large sample of middle‐aged Korean men. This result supports the importance of both reducing sitting time and promoting physical activity for preventing LUTS.

Read more articles of the week

Article of the Week: NICE Advice – Prolaris Gene Expression Assay

/by

Every Week, the Editor-in-Chief selects an Article of the Week from the current issue of BJUI. The summary is reproduced below and you can click on the button to read the full article, which is freely available to all readers for at least 30 days from the time of this post.

If you only have time to read one article this week, it should be this one.

NICE Advice – Prolaris gene expression assay for assessing long‐term risk of prostate cancer progression

Read the full article

Read more articles of the week

Article of the Week: Performance comparison of two AR-V7 detection methods

/by

Every Week the Editor-in-Chief selects an Article of the Week from the current issue of BJUI. The abstract is reproduced below and you can click on the button to read the full article, which is freely available to all readers for at least 30 days from the time of this post.

In addition to the article itself, there is an accompanying editorial written by a prominent member of the urological community. This blog is intended to provoke comment and discussion and we invite you to use the comment tools at the bottom of each post to join the conversation.

If you only have time to read one article this week, it should be this one.

Performance comparison of two androgen receptor splice variant 7 (AR‐V7) detection methods

Christof Bernemann* , Julie Steinestel*, Verena Humberg*, Martin Bogemann*, € Andres Jan Schrader* and Jochen K. Lennerz†

*Urology, University of Muenster Medical Center, Muenster, Germany, and † Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

 

Read the full article

Abstract

Objectives

To compare the performance of two established androgen receptor splice variant 7 (AR‐V7) mRNA detection systems, as paradoxical responses to next‐generation androgen‐deprivation therapy in AR‐V7 mRNA‐positive circulating tumour cells (CTC) of patients with castration‐resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) could be related to false‐positive classification using detection systems with different sensitivities.

Materials and Methods

We compared the performance of two established mRNA‐based AR‐V7 detection technologies using either SYBR Green or TaqMan chemistries. We assessed in vitro performance using eight genitourinary cancer cell lines and serial dilutions in three AR‐V7‐positive prostate cancer cell lines using even 2D barcoded tubes as well as in 32 blood samples from patients with CRPC.

Results

Both assays performed identically in the cell lines and serial dilutions showed identical diagnostic thresholds. Performance comparison in 32 clinical patient samples showed perfect concordance between the assays. In particular, both assays determined AR‐V7 mRNA‐positive CTCs in three patients with unexpected responses to next‐generation anti‐androgen therapy. Thus, technical differences between the assays can be excluded as the underlying reason for the unexpected responses to next‐generation anti‐androgen therapy in a subset of AR‐V7 patients.

Conclusions

Irrespective of the method used, patients with AR‐V7 mRNA‐positive CRPC should not be systematically precluded from an otherwise safe treatment option.

Read more articles of the week

 

Editorial: The way towards understanding possible multiple functions of AR V7 in prostate cancer

/by

The presence of constitutively active androgen receptors in castration therapy‐resistant prostate cancer is frequently associated with therapy resistance. This is not surprising because the transcriptional program of these receptors is not dependent on the presence of circulating androgen. In conditions of reduced expression of circulating androgen, functional activity of the receptor probably contributes to cancer progression. Investigations by Bernemann et al. [1, 2], however, showed that some patients who present with variant ARV7, the most frequently diagnosed variant receptor, still respond to second‐generation anti‐androgen therapy. Until publication of the paper by Bernemann et al. [1], it was not completely clear whether “any findings in this area” reflected a technical error. The authors report further technical advances and similar detection of variant androgen receptors with two PCR assays, the SYBR Green and TaqMan assays. These advances in detection may open up a new area of investigation. The study reported in the current issue of BJUI may therefore shed more light on biology of truncated androgen receptors in prostate cancer [1]. According to the initial seminal publication in the field, AR‐V7‐positive patients had lower endocrine therapy response rates than those who were variant‐negative [3]. Studies aiming to detect variant androgen receptors are particularly important because of increasing interest in circulating tumour cells in prostate cancer [4]. It may be necessary to better describe subgroups of AR‐V7 which may differ in interactions with specific coactivators. Overall, relatively little is known about alterations in interactions between coactivators and the N‐terminal region of the receptor that may occur in subgroups of patients with castration therapy‐resistant prostate cancer [5]. Several important questions regarding signalling between the wild‐type and constitutively active androgen receptor have not been completely clarified, and the issue of which genes are regulated by both receptors is still a matter of discussion. The findings presented in the study by Bernemann et al. [1] may represent the next step towards individualization of therapies. If we accept that variant androgen receptors also display heterogeneity, a more differentiated classification of those receptors may guide clinical decisions in the future. Future studies should also take into consideration the fact that different variants may be expressed at different levels during and after endocrine therapy. These ratios of androgen receptor variant expression may be taken into consideration when determining the probability of success of specific anti‐androgen receptor therapy. One could also learn that application of different methodologies in variant androgen receptor diagnostics may become an established standard in monitoring castration therapy‐resistant disease. Establishment of controlled standard operating procedures in PCR diagnostics may at this stage minimize discrepancies between findings reported by different researchers and help to establish a consensus on this important topic.

Zoran Culig

Experimental Urology, Department of Urology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstrasse 35, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria

Read the full article

References

  1. Bernemann C, Steinestel J, Humberg V, Bögemann M, Schrader AJ, Lennerz JK. Performance comparison of two AR‐V7 detection methods. BJU Int 2018; 122: 219–26

 

Article of the Month: The UK‐ROPE Study

/3 Comments/by

Every Month, the Editor-in-Chief selects an Article of the Month from the current issue of BJUI. The abstract is reproduced below and you can click on the button to read the full article, which is freely available to all readers for at least 30 days from the time of this post. retainedfirefighter provides more articles like this one. Follow for more articles like this one songsforromance .

In addition to the article itself, there is an accompanying editorial written by a prominent member of the urological community. This blog is intended to provoke comment and discussion and we invite you to use the comment tools at the bottom of each post to join the conversation.

If you only have time to read one article this week, it should be this one .

Efficacy and safety of prostate artery embolization for benign prostatic hyperplasia: an observational study and propensity‐matched comparison with transurethral resection of the prostate (the UK‐ROPE study)

 

Alistair F. Ray*, John Powell†‡, Mark J. Speakman§, Nicholas T. Longford, Ranan DasGupta**, Timothy Bryant††, Sachin Modi††, Jonathan Dyer‡‡, Mark Harris‡‡, Grace Carolan-Rees* and Nigel Hacking††

 

*Cedar, Cardiff University/Cardiff and Vale University Health Board, Cardiff, †Centre for Health Technology Evaluation, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, London, ‡Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, §Department of Urology, Taunton and Somerset NHS Trust, Taunton, SNTL Statistics Research and Consulting, Department of Medicine, Imperial College London, **Department of Urology, St. Mary’s Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, ††Department of Interventional Radiology, and ‡‡Department of Urology, Southampton General Hospital, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK

 

Read the full article

Abstract

Objectives

To assess the efficacy and safety of prostate artery embolization (PAE) for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and to conduct an indirect comparison of PAE with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).

Patients and Methods

As a joint initiative between the British Society of Interventional Radiologists, the British Association of Urological Surgeons and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, we conducted the UK Register of Prostate Embolization (UK‐ROPE) study, which recruited 305 patients across 17 UK urological/interventional radiology centres, 216 of whom underwent PAE and 89 of whom underwent TURP. The primary outcomes were International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) improvement in the PAE group at 12 months post‐procedure, and complication data post‐PAE. We also aimed to compare IPSS score improvements between the PAE and TURP groups, using non‐inferiority analysis on propensity‐score‐matched patient pairs. The clinical results and urological measurements were performed at clinical sites. If you want more articles like this one follow us at salbreux-pesage . IPSS and other questionnaire‐based results were mailed by patients directly to the trial unit managing the study. All data were uploaded centrally to the UK‐ROPE study database.

Results

The results showed that PAE was clinically effective, producing a median 10‐point IPSS improvement from baseline at 12 months post‐procedure. PAE did not appear to be as effective as TURP, which produced a median 15‐point IPSS score improvement at 12 months post‐procedure. These findings are further supported by the propensity score analysis, in which we formed 65 closely matched pairs of patients who underwent PAE and patients who underwent TURP. In terms of IPSS and quality‐of‐life (QoL) improvement, there was no evidence of PAE being non‐inferior to TURP. Patients in the PAE group had a statistically significant improvement in maximum urinary flow rate and prostate volume reduction at 12 months post‐procedure. PAE had a reoperation rate of 5% before 12 months and 15% after 12 months (20% total rate), and a low complication rate. Of 216 patients, one had sepsis, one required a blood transfusion, four had local arterial dissection and four had a groin haematoma. Two patients had non‐target embolization that presented as self‐limiting penile ulcers. Additional patient‐reported outcomes, pain levels and return to normal activities were very encouraging for PAE. Seventy‐one percent of PAE cases were performed as outpatient or day cases. In contrast, 80% of TURP cases required at least 1 night of hospital stay, and the majority required 2 nights.Here excelpasswordrecovery you can check the best articles of the month.

Conclusion

Our results indicate that PAE provides a clinically and statistically significant improvement in symptoms and QoL, although some of these improvements were greater in the TURP arm. The safety profile and quicker return to normal activities may be seen as highly beneficial by patients considering PAE as an alternative treatment to TURP, with the concomitant advantages of reduced length of hospital stay and need for admission after PAE. PAE is an advanced embolization technique demanding a high level of expertise, and should be performed by experienced interventional radiologists who have been trained and proctored appropriately. The use of cone‐beam computed tomography is encouraged to improve operator confidence and minimize non‐target embolizations. The place of PAE in the care pathway is between that of drugs and surgery, allowing the clinician to tailor treatment to individual patients’ symptoms, requirements and anatomical variation.

Read more articles of the week

 

Editorial: Prostate Artery Embolization

/by

Andrea Tubaro, in his editorial for European Association of Urology 2006 [1], discussed the paradigm shift in the surgical management of BPH from open surgery to TURP, and postulated that more refined and less invasive techniques would further dictate the treatment pathway to reduce cost, manage more high-risk surgical cases and reduce blood loss in a population that increasingly is on antithrombotic and anticoagulant medication, to ease the management of large prostates, and to manage BPH as a day case procedure [1].

Interventional radiology has been at the forefront of minimally invasive procedures. In 1953, Seldinger [2] published his ingenious method of introducing a catheter into the vascular system after obtaining needle access and, 10 years later, Dotter recognized the potential of catheters to be used in performing intravascular surgery [3]. Superselective prostate artery embolization (PAE) was first described by DeMeritt et al. [4]. Pisco et al. [5] from Portugal and Carnevale et al. [6] from Brazil have rightly been credited with the development of the clinical service for PAE in BPH. The study by Pisco et al. in 2016, in 630 consecutive patients with moderate to severe LUTS refractory to medical therapy for at least 6 months, showed 81.9% medium-term and 76.3% long-term clinical success rates, with no urinary incontinence or sexual dysfunction reported. Carnevale et al. [6], in 2014, described a modified PAE technique that can lead to greater ischaemia and infarction of the prostate gland with the possibility of better clinical outcomes [6].

In this edition of BJUI, the UK Register of Prostate Embolization (ROPE) study [7] provides evidence for the efficacy and safety for PAE for LUTS secondary to BPH and makes an indirect comparison with TURP. What is strikingly unique and to be applauded in this registry is the collaboration between the British Society of Interventional Radiology, the BAUS and National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE).

A total of 305 patients across 17 UK centres were enrolled, and results were analysed over 12 months. They noted that patients who underwent PAE had a statistically significant improvement in urinary flow rate and reduction in prostate volume after the procedure. In terms of IPSS and quality-of-life improvement, there was no evidence of PAE being non-inferior to TURP. Seventy-one percent of PAE cases were performed as outpatients or day cases. By contrast, 80% of TURPs required at least one night of hospital stay and a majority two nights [7].

In April 2018, NICE revised their guidelines and have now approved PAE with certain recommendations [8].

The key to successful PAE, in our opinion, is careful patient selection. At our centre, we receive tertiary referrals of patients with very large prostates, many of whom are comorbid and elderly. We embraced the option of PAE and were delighted to be able to contribute a number of cases to the ROPE study. Our overall experience is now in excess of 200 cases and we are aware that some patients will do well, others less well. It is becoming clearer who those patients may be; those who do well tend to be those with the larger prostate with large lateral lobes and adenomatous predominant BPH, without a significant middle lobe, with big prostate vessels and with lower risk of significant renal insufficiency. The large middle lobes can ball-valve and still obstruct, and preoperative arterial CT could identify those with heavily calcified, severely diseased internal iliac arteries that may be difficult to embolize. Nonetheless, those patients who are at highest risk from surgery and those who wish to minimize the risks of sexual dysfunction or incontinence may justifiably opt for PAE as a less invasive outpatient procedure. And why should they not? For many, simply the opportunity to avoid long-term medication with a-blockers or 5-a-reductase inhibitors is the real benefit, and undergoing PAE does not exclude one from surgery afterwards.

Level 1 evidence is of course a fundamental requirement for a change in definitive practice; the ROPE study is a comparative cohort of two fundamentally different procedures. Our institute is a surgical centre for the management of massive BPH and we are convinced that PAE has a place in the management of some of our patients, but could prevention be better than cure? Ambitious it may be, but who is to say whether early PAE in symptomatic patients might reduce the progression of clinical BPH, avoiding the morbidity and cost of long-term medical treatment culminating in surgery. Perhaps the real challenge highlighted by the ROPE study is that the time has come to consider a randomized controlled trial of prostate embolization vs early non-surgical treatment of BPH (short title ‘PREVENT-BPH’), with randomization to PAE or either a-blockers and/or 5-a-reductase inhibitors or placebo. The ROPE study suggests that PAE at the least deserves a randomized controlled trial including it vs other non-invasive treatments.

Tarun Sabharwal and Rick Popert
Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK

Read the full article

References

  1. Tubaro A. BPH treatment: a paradigm shift. Eur Urol 2006; 49: 939–41
  2. Seldinger SI. Catheter replacement of the needle in percutaneous arteriography; a new technique. Acta Radiol 1953; 39: 368–76
  3. Dotter CT, Judkins MP. Transluminal treatment of atherosclerotic obstructions: description of a new technique and preliminary report of its applications. Circulation 1964; 30: 654–70
  4. DeMeritt JS, Elmasri FF, Esposito MP, Rosenberg GS. Relief of benign prostatic hyperplasia-related bladder outlet obstruction after transarterial polyvinyl alcohol prostate embolization. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2000; 11: 767–70
  5. Pisco JM, Bilhim T, Pinheiro LC et al. Medium-and long-term outcome of prostate artery embolization for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia: results in 630 patients. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2016; 27: 1115–22
  6. Carnevale FC, Moreira AM, Antunes AA. The “PErFecTED Technique”: proximal embolisation first, then embolise distal for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2014; 37: 1602–5
  7. Ray AF, Powell J, Speakman MJ et al. Efficacy and safety of prostate artery embolization for benign prostatic hyperplasia: an observational study and propensity-matched comparison with transurethral resection of the prostate (the UK-ROPE study). BJU Int 2018; 122: 270–82
  8. NICE Guidance. Prostate artery embolisation for lower urinary tract symptoms caused by benign prostatic hyperplasia. BJU Int 2018;121: 825-34

 

© 2024 BJU International. All Rights Reserved.