PURPOSE: To identify predictors of incidental prostate cancer following Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 458 consecutive patients who underwent HoLEP. Patients were classified into two groups: patients who received prostate biopsy prior to HoLEP (biopsy group, n = 174) and patients who did not (non-biopsy group, n = 284). The two groups were compared. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the predictive factors. RESULTS: A total of 27 patients (5.9 %) were incidentally diagnosed with prostate cancer. The incidence of prostate cancer was not significantly different between the two groups (biopsy group vs. non-biopsy group: 6.9 vs. 5.3 %, p = 0.48). Using multivariate analysis, a hypoechoic lesion identified by transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) was the only predictor of incidental prostate cancer (odds ratio 2.829; 95 % confidence interval 1.061-7.539; p = 0.038). In the biopsy group, there were no significant differences in baseline characteristics including prostate size, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), PSA density, digital rectal examination (DRE) findings, and TRUS findings, between patients with and without prostate cancer. However, in the non-biopsy group, a hypoechoic lesion was found more frequently in patients with prostate cancer (prostate cancer vs. benign prostatic hyperplasia: 20.0 vs. 3.3 %, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Prior negative prostate biopsy does not rule out the possibility of prostate cancer after HoLEP. The presence of a hypoechoic lesion on TRUS might be helpful to predict incidental prostate cancer after HoLEP in patients with normal PSA and negative DRE. Prostate biopsy prior to HoLEP should be considered in these patients.
PURPOSE: To identify predictors of incidental prostate cancer following Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 458 consecutive patients who underwent HoLEP. Patients were classified into two groups: patients who received prostate biopsy prior to HoLEP (biopsy group, n = 174) and patients who did not (non-biopsy group, n = 284). The two groups were compared. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the predictive factors. RESULTS: A total of 27 patients (5.9 %) were incidentally diagnosed with prostate cancer. The incidence of prostate cancer was not significantly different between the two groups (biopsy group vs. non-biopsy group: 6.9 vs. 5.3 %, p = 0.48). Using multivariate analysis, a hypoechoic lesion identified by transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) was the only predictor of incidental prostate cancer (odds ratio 2.829; 95 % confidence interval 1.061-7.539; p = 0.038). In the biopsy group, there were no significant differences in baseline characteristics including prostate size, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), PSA density, digital rectal examination (DRE) findings, and TRUS findings, between patients with and without prostate cancer. However, in the non-biopsy group, a hypoechoic lesion was found more frequently in patients with prostate cancer (prostate cancer vs. benign prostatic hyperplasia: 20.0 vs. 3.3 %, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Prior negative prostate biopsy does not rule out the possibility of prostate cancer after HoLEP. The presence of a hypoechoic lesion on TRUS might be helpful to predict incidental prostate cancer after HoLEP in patients with normal PSA and negative DRE. Prostate biopsy prior to HoLEP should be considered in these patients.
Authors: Richard Zigeuner; Luigi Schips; Katja Lipsky; Marko Auprich; Michael Salfellner; Peter Rehak; Karl Pummer; Gerhart Hubmer Journal: Urology Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Bernd Rosenhammer; Eva M Lausenmeyer; Roman Mayr; Maximilian Burger; Christian Eichelberg Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Annika Herlemann; Kerstin Wegner; Alexander Roosen; Alexander Buchner; Philipp Weinhold; Alexander Bachmann; Christian G Stief; Christian Gratzke; Giuseppe Magistro Journal: World J Urol Date: 2017-05-17 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Jens Köllermann; Benedikt Hoeh; Daniel Ruppel; Kevin Smith; Henning Reis; Mike Wenzel; Felix Preisser; Marina Kosiba; Philipp Mandel; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Andreas Becker; Felix K H Chun; Peter Wild; Luis A Kluth Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2022-06-17 Impact factor: 4.535