PURPOSE: Recently, more vaporization techniques are available for the treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH). However, the detection of incidental prostate cancer (Pca) is impossible in vaporization techniques because of unavailability prostate tissue for histopathological analysis. To evaluate the clinical backgrounds and the usefulness of prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-related factors in incidental Pca, we employed our BPH patients cohort treated by holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP). METHODS: A total of 365 HoLEPs were performed by a single surgeon. The pathological results and pre- and post-HoLEP PSA, PSA density and PSA velocity were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: Incidental Pca was identified in 25 (6.8 %) of the 365 patients treated with HoLEP. There were significant differences between BPH and Pca in terms of prostate volume (55.5 vs. 47 ml, p = 0.0365), preoperative PSA (4.50 vs. 7.14 ng/ml, p = 0.0107), PSA density (0.079 vs. 0.155 ng/ml/cm(3), p = 0.0005), and postoperative PSA velocity (0.04 vs. 0.22 ng/ml/year, p = 0.0033), respectively. Comparisons of Gleason score subgroups in the 25 patients with incidental Pca identified significant differences in preoperative PSA (6.06 vs. 21.6 ng/ml, p = 0.0191) and postoperative PSA velocity (0.185 vs. 1.32 ng/ml/year, p = 0.0382) between the Gleason score 3 + 3 and Gleason score >3 + 3 groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Risk factors associated with incidental Pca were smaller prostate volume, higher preoperative PSA, and higher PSA density. Postoperative PSA velocity was also significantly increased in patients with incidental Pca, especially those with higher Gleason score. These finding may be useful in incident Pca patients treated by the vaporization technique.
PURPOSE: Recently, more vaporization techniques are available for the treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH). However, the detection of incidental prostate cancer (Pca) is impossible in vaporization techniques because of unavailability prostate tissue for histopathological analysis. To evaluate the clinical backgrounds and the usefulness of prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-related factors in incidental Pca, we employed our BPH patients cohort treated by holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP). METHODS: A total of 365 HoLEPs were performed by a single surgeon. The pathological results and pre- and post-HoLEP PSA, PSA density and PSA velocity were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: Incidental Pca was identified in 25 (6.8 %) of the 365 patients treated with HoLEP. There were significant differences between BPH and Pca in terms of prostate volume (55.5 vs. 47 ml, p = 0.0365), preoperative PSA (4.50 vs. 7.14 ng/ml, p = 0.0107), PSA density (0.079 vs. 0.155 ng/ml/cm(3), p = 0.0005), and postoperative PSA velocity (0.04 vs. 0.22 ng/ml/year, p = 0.0033), respectively. Comparisons of Gleason score subgroups in the 25 patients with incidental Pca identified significant differences in preoperative PSA (6.06 vs. 21.6 ng/ml, p = 0.0191) and postoperative PSA velocity (0.185 vs. 1.32 ng/ml/year, p = 0.0382) between the Gleason score 3 + 3 and Gleason score >3 + 3 groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Risk factors associated with incidental Pca were smaller prostate volume, higher preoperative PSA, and higher PSA density. Postoperative PSA velocity was also significantly increased in patients with incidental Pca, especially those with higher Gleason score. These finding may be useful in incident Pca patients treated by the vaporization technique.
Authors: Scott E Eggener; Peter T Scardino; Patrick C Walsh; Misop Han; Alan W Partin; Bruce J Trock; Zhaoyong Feng; David P Wood; James A Eastham; Ofer Yossepowitch; Danny M Rabah; Michael W Kattan; Changhong Yu; Eric A Klein; Andrew J Stephenson Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-01-15 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Rafael Nunez; Kimberly J Hurd; Brie N Noble; Erik P Castle; Paul E Andrews; Mitchell R Humphreys Journal: Int J Urol Date: 2011-05-18 Impact factor: 3.369
Authors: William W Tinmouth; Enmar Habib; Samuel C Kim; Ramsay L Kuo; Ryan F Paterson; Colin L Terry; Mostafa Elhilali; James E Lingeman Journal: J Endourol Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Sebastian Melchior; Boris Hadaschik; Sebastian Thüroff; Christian Thomas; Rolf Gillitzer; Joachim Thüroff Journal: BJU Int Date: 2008-12-08 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Philip M Arlen; Fernando Bianco; William L Dahut; Anthony D'Amico; William D Figg; Stephen J Freedland; James L Gulley; Philip W Kantoff; Michael W Kattan; Andrew Lee; Meredith M Regan; Oliver Sartor Journal: J Urol Date: 2008-04-18 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Umberto Capitanio; Vincenzo Scattoni; Massimo Freschi; Alberto Briganti; Andrea Salonia; Andrea Gallina; Renzo Colombo; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Patrizio Rigatti; Francesco Montorsi Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2008-02-26 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Mary Martos; Jonathan E Katz; Madhumita Parmar; Anika Jain; Nachiketh Soodana-Prakash; Sanoj Punnen; Mark L Gonzalgo; Feng Miao; Isildinha M Reis; Nicholas Smith; Hemendra N Shah Journal: BJUI Compass Date: 2021-01-05