Can Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP) Be Another Gateway to the Focal Therapy of Localized Prostate Cancer?
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background and Objectives
Minimally invasive methods are expected to avoid the risk of overtreatment and overtreatment of radical therapy to manage the increased number of patients with low-volume, low-grade localized prostate cancer. Based on our experience of radical transurethral resection of prostate cancer (TURPCa) as a radical treatment, we studied the efficacy and safety of focal TURPCa as a focal therapy for patients with localized prostate cancer.
Materials and Methods
We performed focal TURPCa in 49 patients during the period from July 2007 to August 2016 and followed them with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing for the mean period of 68.0 months. We selected the patient as a candidate for the study if the biopsy revealed that cancer foci were limited in one lobe, or the foci were several or less even found in both lobes. Standard TURP was followed by further resection and fulguration of the peripheral zone where cancer was considered to exist. We selected one of our three methods of focal TURPCa as follows: one lobe radical TURPCa, radical resection of the affected lobe with unaffected lobe being resected less vigorously; nerve-sparing radical TURPCa, radical resection of both lobes except for the posterolateral part of the prostate; target radical TURPCa, radical resection of the cancer focus and the surrounding prostate when the target is suggested single.
Results
Twelve patients were in the low-risk group (D’Amico), 29 in the intermediate-risk group, and 8 in the high-risk group. Pathological stages were as follows: pT0, three cases; pT2a-b, 17 cases; pT2c, 29 cases. The preoperative PSA of 6.15±2.73 ng/mL (mean±SD) dropped to 0.172±0.283 ng/mL postoperatively. PSA failure occurred in only two patients (4.1%). Incontinence did not develop and erectile function was preserved in eight (44.4%) of the 18 potent patients. The most frequent complication was bladder neck contracture (20.4%). Other complications included acute epididymitis (8.1%), bladder tamponade (2.0%). No patients died of prostate cancer.
Conclusions
Though the final assessment of efficacy will require long-term follow-up results with more cases, we may think focal TURPCa can be another treatment option as a focal therapy for localized prostate cancer.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright of articles published in all DPG titles is retained by the author(s). The author(s) grants DPG the rights to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher. The author grants DPG exclusive commercial rights to the article. The author grants any party the rights to use the article freely for non-commercial purposes provided that the original work is properly cited.
References
2. Bul M, Zhu X, Valdagni R, et al. Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer worldwide: the PRIAS study. Eur Urol 2013;63(4):597–603. Doi.org/10.1016/j. eururo.2012.11.005.
3. Bruinsma SM, Bangma CH, Carroll PR, et al. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a narrative review of clinical guidelines. Nat Rev Urol 2016;13:151–67. Doi. org/10.1038/nrurol.2015.313
4. Bostwick DG, Waters DJ, Farley ER, et al. Group Consensus Reports from the Consensus Conference on Focal Treatment of Prostatic Carcinoma Celebration, Florida, February 24, 2006. Urology 2007;70(Suppl.6A):42–44. Doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2007.07.037.
5. Eggener SE, Scardino PT, Carroll PR, et al. Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: A critical appraisal of rationale and modalities. J Urol 2007;178(6):2260–67. Doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.08.072.
6. Ahmed HU, Akin O, Coleman JA, et al. Transatlantic Consensus Group on active surveillance and focal therapy for prostate cancer. BJU Int;2011(11);109:1636–47. Doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10633.x.
7. Onik GM, Cohen J K, Reyes GD, et al. Transrectal ultrasound-guided percutaneous radical cryosurgical ablation of the prostate. Cancer 1993;72(4):1291–99. Doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19930815)72:4<1291:aid-cncr2820720423>3.0.co;2-i.
8. Babaian RJ, Donnelly B, Bahn D, et al. Best practice statement on cryosurgery for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. J Urol 1993;180(5):1993–2004. Doi. org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.07.108. Epub 2008 Sep 25.
9. Madersbacher S, Pedevilla M, Vingers L, et al. Effect of high-intensity focused ultrasound on human prostate cancer in vivo. Cancer Res 1995;55(15):3346–51.
10. Poissonnier L, Chapelon JY, Rouviere O, et al. Control of prostate cancer by transrectal HIFU in 227 patients. Eur Urol 2007;51(2):381–87. Doi.org/10.1016/j. eururo.2006.04.012.
11. Nelson JB, Ahmed HU. Focal therapy will become standard treatment for localized prostate cancer. J Urol 2012;187(3):791–92. Doi.org/10.1016/j. juro.2011.12.022.
12. Huo AS, Hossack T, Symons JL. Accuracy of primary systematic template guided transperineal biopsy of the prostate for locating prostate cancer: a comparison with radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 2012;187(6):2044– 49. Doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.01.066
13. Hu Y, Ahmed HU, Carter T, et al. A biopsy simulation study to access the accuracy of several transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-biopsy strategies compared with template prostate mapping biopsies in patients who have undergone radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2012;110(6):812–20. Doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.10933.x.
14. Chelluri R, Kilchevsky A., George AK, et al. Prostate cancer diagnosis on repeat magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy of benign lesions: Recommendations for repeat sampling. Urology 2016;196(1):62–67. Doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.066.
15. Frye TP, Pinto PA, George AK. Optimizing patient population for MP-MRI and fusion biopsy for prostate cancer detection. Curr Urol Rep 2015;16(7):50. Doi. org/ 10.1007/s11934-015-0521-y.
16. George AK, Pinto PA, Rais-Bahrami S. Multiparametric MRI in the PSA screening era. Biomed Res Int 2014; 465816. Available from: http://dx.doi. org/10.1155/2014/465816.
17. Morita M, Matsuura T. Radical treatment of localized prostate cancer by radical transurethral resection of the prostate cancer. Curr Urol 2009;3(2):87–93. Doi. org/10.1159/000189690.
18. Morita M, Matsuura T. Successful treatment of incidental prostate cancer by radical transurethral resection of prostate cancer. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2013;11(2):94–99. Doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2012.09.012.
19. Morita M, Matsuura T. Management of localized can-cer by focal transurethral resection of prostate cancer (TUR-PCa): An application of radical TUR-PCa to focal therapy. Advance Urol 2012: 564372. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/564372.
20. Morita M, Matsuura T. An advanced but traditional technique of transurethral resection of the prostate no to overlook stage T1 prostate cancer. Curr Urol 2012;6(1):21–26. Doi.org/10.1159/000338864.
21. Morita M, Matsuura T. Incidental prostate cancer: Predictors of progression and strategies of management based on prostate-specific antigen. J Cancer Treat Res 2014;2(6):56–60. Doi.org/10.11648/j.jctr.20140206.11.
22. Donaldson IA, Alonzi R, Barratt D, et al. Focal therapy: patients, interventions, and outcomes—a report from a consensus meeting. Eur Urol 2015;67(4):771–77. Doi. org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.09.018.
23. Nour SG. Magnetic Resonance image-guided prostate ablation. Semin Intervent Radiol 2016;33(3):206–16. Doi.org/10.1055/s-0036-1586153.
24. Rischmann P, Gelet A, Riche B, et al. Focal high intensity focused ultrasound of unilateral localized prostate cancer: A prospective multicentric hemiablation study of 111 patients. Eur Urol 2017;71(2):267–73. Doi. org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.09.039.
25. Sundaram KM, Chang SS, Penson DF, et al. Therapeutic ultrasound and prostate cancer. Semin Intervent Radiol 2017;34(2):187–200. Doi.org/ 10.1055/s-0037-1602710.
26. Albisinni S, Melot C, Aoun F, et al. Focal treatment for unilateral prostate cancer using high-intensity focal ultrasound: A comprehensive study of pooled data. J Endourol 2018;32(9):797–804. Doi.org/10.1089/end.2018.0130.
27. Pesapane F, Patella F, Fumarola EM, et al. The prostate cancer focal therapy. Gland Surg 2018;7(2):89–102. Doi.org/10.21037/gs.2017.11.08
28. Sinnott M, Falzarano SM, Hernandez AV, et al. Discrepancy in prostate cancer localization between biopsy and prostatectomy specimens in patients with unilateral positive biopsy: implications for focal therapy. Prostate 2012;72(11):1179–86. Doi.org/10.1002/pros.22467.
29. Gallina A, Maccagnano C, Suardi N, et al. Unilateral positive biopsies in low risk prostate cancer patients diagnosed with extended transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy schemes do not predict unilateral prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2012;110(2b):E64–68. Doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10762.x.
30. Washington SL, Bonham M, Whitson JM, et al. Transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy does not reliably identify dominant cancer location in men with low-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int 2012;110(1):50–55. Doi. org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10704.x.
31. Ramirez D, Zhao LC, Bagrodia A, et al. Deep lateral transurethral incisions for recurrent bladder nick contracture: Promising 5-year experience using a standardized approach. Urology 2013;82(6):1430–35. doi. org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.08.018.