“Finding the needle in a haystack”: oncologic evaluation of patients treated for LUTS with holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) versus transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)

Optimal PSA density threshold for prostate biopsy in benign prostatic obstruction patients with elevated PSA levels but negative MRI findings

PURPOSE

This study was designed to identify a useful clinical parameter or model for prostate biopsy in surgery-indicated benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) patients with elevated PSA levels and negative multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed clinical and pathological data from patients who were diagnosed with BPH and admitted to the inpatient department for surgery between January 2010 and September 2020. Clinical data, including age, prostate specific antigen (PSA) level, F/T PSA ratio, prostate volume, and PSA density (PSAD), were used for comprehensive analysis. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to develop a predictive model. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and decision curve analysis (DCA) were performed to assess the diagnostic value of the predictive model, PSA concentration, F/T PSA ratio and PSAD.

RESULTS

A total of 318 patients were included in the study, 8.2% (26/318) of whom were histologically diagnosed with prostate cancer (PCa). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses revealed that PSAD was the only independent predictor of PCa biopsy. ROC curve analysis of PCa detection revealed a larger area under the curve (AUC) for the predictive model (AUC 0.855) and for PSAD (AUC 0.848) than for PSA (AUC 0.722) or the F/T PSA ratio (AUC 0.635). DCA demonstrated that the optimal strategy would be to restrict biopsies to men with a PSAD of 0.30 ng/ml/cm3.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggested that for BPH patients with surgical indications who present with PSA abnormalities and negative imaging findings, the use of a new PSAD threshold of 0.30 ng/ml/cm3 could facilitate convenient and sound biopsy decisions. This approach could reduce the complications and length of hospital stay associated with biopsies and reduce hospital costs.

Predictive factors of incidental prostate cancer in patients undergoing surgery for presumed benign prostatic hyperplasia: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

We aimed to identify the clinical predictors of incidental prostate cancer (IPCa) after surgery for presumed benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

Methods

The literature was comprehensively searched using PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases in December 2024. We used pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) and odds ratio (OR) to describe the correlation between relevant risk factors and IPCa.

Results

Twenty-one studies included 10,842 patients that were available for further analysis. After BPH surgery, 957 patients were histopathologically diagnosed with IPCa. The IPCa rate was 8.83%. Most importantly, our results identified that IPCa was significantly associated with age (pooled SMD = 0.36, P < 0.001), body mass index (BMI) (pooled SMD = 0.23, P < 0.001), preoperative prostate-specific antigen (pre-PSA) (pooled SMD = 0.43, P < 0.001), preoperative prostate-specific antigen density (pre-PSAD) (pooled SMD = 0.62, P = 0.028), resected prostate weight (pooled SMD = -0.22, P < 0.001), preoperative treatment with 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5αRIs) (yes/no) (pooled OR = 0.60, P < 0.001), family history (yes/no) (pooled OR = 3.81, P = 0.029), digital rectal examination (DRE) findings (abnormal/normal) (pooled OR = 5.15, P < 0.001), and transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) findings (abnormal/normal) (pooled OR = 2.92, P < 0.001). Additionally, sensitivity and subgroup analyses indicated that our findings were reliable and robust. However, we found no significant associations between IPCa and prostate volume, preoperative negative prostate biopsy, smoking history, history of hypertension, history of diabetes, history of dyslipidemia, and abnormal magnetic resonance imaging findings (all P > 0.05).

Conclusions

Age, BMI, pre-PSA, pre-PSAD, resected prostate weight, preoperative treatment with 5αRIs, family history, abnormal DRE findings, and abnormal TRUS findings are independent factors predicting IPCa following BPH surgery. Before BPH surgery, factors such as age, BMI, pre-PSA, and pre-PSAD should be considered to assess the risk of IPCa. For high-risk patients, more detailed imaging and needle biopsy are recommended before surgery to avoid missed diagnosis. In the future, more large-scale and well-designed studies are needed to validate our results further.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42025631346.

A comparative analysis of robotic prostatectomy techniques post TURP/HOLEP: retzius-sparing vs. non-retzius approaches: evaluation of perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes

PURPOSE

We evaluated the perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes of Retzius-sparing and conventional non-Retzius-sparing robotic radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP and NRS-RARP) in the patients with a prior history of transurethral resection and enucleation of prostate (Post TURP/HOLEP).

METHODS

A total of 47 patients who had at least completed one year of follow-up after robotic radical prostatectomy and had a prior TURP/HOLEP were included in this retrospective analysis. The clinico-demographic data, perioperative parameters such as mean operating time, blood loss, mean hospital stay, complications as per Clavien-Dindo grading, and readmission were evaluated. Continence, potency, and biochemical recurrence were assessed to check the functional and oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in mean age, body mass index (BMI), co-morbidities, D-Amico risk stratification, preoperative PSA level and positive cores in TRUS-guided biopsy. The console time and blood loss were significantly less in the RS-RARP group (91.6 ± 24.2 vs. 128.9 ± 38.7 min vs. 110.3 ± 57.5 vs. 152.9 ± 64.9 ml, p = 0.0002 and p = 0.02, respectively). The complication rate, mean postoperative catheter duration, lymph nodes, readmission rates, final histopathology, and invasion status were similar in both groups. Continence achieved at 1,3,6,9 and 12-month follow-up was significantly more in the RS-RARP group (90% vs. 64.7% at 12-month; p = 0.01). The potency rates in nerve-sparing cases at 6-month and 1-year follow-ups were similar. Margin positivity rates and Biochemical recurrence were comparable and statistically insignificant in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Retzius-sparing RARP had less console time, less intraoperative blood loss and better continence recovery in both immediate and at 12-month follow-up. The potency, biochemical recurrence and margin status in both approaches were similar.

Do Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) lesions predict holmium laser enucleation of prostate outcomes?

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is used for prostate cancer (PCa) screening and risk stratification and is helpful for surgical planning for patients undergoing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP). There are few studies investigating the correlation between MRI Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) lesion characteristics and HoLEP pathology and outcomes.

METHODS

We performed retrospective review of patients who underwent HoLEP between January 2021 and August 2023 by a single surgeon. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative characteristics and outcomes were analyzed for all patients who had a documented preoperative prostate MRI.

RESULTS

There were 334 patients without a pre-existing diagnosis of PCa and with a preoperative prostate MRI, of which 140 (42%) had at least one PIRADS lesion. There was a total of 203 PIRADS lesions: 91 (45%) in the peripheral zone (PZ), 106 (52%) in the transition zone (TZ), and 6 (2%) not specified. Incidental PCa was noted in 44 (13%) patients at time of HoLEP. Presence or location of lesion was not significantly associated with rate or grade of incidental PCa on pathology. Greater number of lesions and lesion size correlated with longer procedure times. Lesion number, size, or grade were not found to correlate with cancer grade or rate of cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Grade, presence, location, size, and number of PIRADS lesions on preoperative prostate MRI for patients with an appropriate prior PCa workup were not significantly associated with incidental PCa or higher PCa grade on HoLEP pathology.

Incidental prostate carcinoma after single-port robot-assisted simple prostatectomy: a multi-institutional report (SPARC)

BACKGROUND

Single-port robot-assisted simple prostatectomy is a minimally invasive alternative for patients with large benign prostatic hyperplasia with severe symptoms and/or failure of medical treatment. In recent literature, the rate of incidental prostate cancer after simple prostatectomy ranges from 1.8% to 13.0%. Our objective is to report the rate of incidental prostate cancer after single-port robot-assisted simple prostatectomy and to compare our findings to other approaches.

METHODS

A Single-Port Advanced Research Consortium [SPARC] multi-institutional retrospective analysis of all initial consecutive single-port robot-assisted simple prostatectomy cases performed from 2019 to 2023 by eleven surgeons from six centers. Our primary outcome was the rate of incidental prostate cancer in adenoma specimens. We used descriptive statistics to analyze the data.

RESULTS

A total of 235 cases were performed successfully without conversions or additional ports. Eleven patients (4.6%) were found to have incidental prostate cancer on pathological analysis. The median percentage of tissue involved by the tumor was 5%. The overall rate of clinically significant prostate cancer was 2.1%. Most cases were Gleason Grade Group 1 (55%). Those with Grade Group ≤3 were subsequently managed with active surveillance with a median follow-up of 17 months. A patient with Gleason Grade Group 4 underwent an uncomplicated multi-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with satisfactory functional and oncological outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial multi-institutional experience with single-port robot-assisted simple prostatectomy showed an incidental prostate cancer rate of 4.6%, comparable to MP, laparoscopic, and open techniques.

Perioperative Rates of Incidental Prostate Cancer after Aquablation and Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate

INTRODUCTION

Aquablation and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) have evolved as established therapeutic options for men with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). We sought to compare the rates of incidental prostate cancer (iPCa) after aquablation and HoLEP.

METHODS

At our center, between January 2020 and November 2022, 317 men underwent aquablation, and 979 men underwent HoLEP for BPO. Histopathological assessment of resected tissue was conducted in all cases. If iPCa was detected, the Gleason score and percentage of affected tissue were assessed. Differences in important predictive factors for prostate cancer between study groups were accounted for by additional matched pairs analysis (with matching on age ± 1 year; PSA ± 0.5 ng/mL; and prostate volume ± 5 mL).

RESULTS

Histopathology revealed iPCas in 60 patients (4.6%): 59 (6.03%) after HoLEP and 1 (0.3%) after aquablation (p = 0.001). Of 60 of incidental cancers, 11 had a Gleason score ≥7 (aquablation: 1/1 [100%]; HoLEP: 10/59 [16.9%]). The aquablation and HoLEP study groups differed in patient age, preoperative PSA, and prostate volume. Therefore, matched pairs analysis (aquablation: 132 patients; HoLEP: 132 patients) was conducted to improve comparability. Also after the matching procedure, significantly fewer iPCas were diagnosed after aquablation than HoLEP (aquablation: 0 [0%]; HoLEP: 6 [4.5%]; p = 0.015).

CONCLUSION

Significantly fewer iPCas were identified after aquablation than HoLEP procedures. Histopathologic assessment of tissue after aquablation is feasible and may lead to the diagnosis of clinically significant iPCa. Therefore, histopathologic examination of the aquablation resective tissue should not be omitted.

Incidental prostate cancer after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: Critical analysis of independent risk factors and impact on surgical outcomes

Objectives

The objectives of this study are to evaluate the impact of incidental prostate cancer (iPCa) and its different grade group (GG) on the surgical outcomes of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and, furthermore, to assess the independent risk factors associated with the detection of iPCa.

Patients or materials and Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted at a single institution for HoLEP cases that were performed between 2017 and 2022. Patients with a preoperative diagnosis of prostate cancer and those without baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels within 1 year were excluded. Four hundred seventeen patients were divided into three groups: benign prostatic hyperplasia-377; clinically insignificant (GG 1)-29; and clinically significant prostate cancer (GG 2-5)-11. The preoperative parameters analysed included age, body mass index, race/ethnicity, use of 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors, PSA, prostate size, PSA density, and history of negative prostate biopsy. To evaluate the association between clinical and demographic variables, a multivariable-adjusted logistic regression analysis was performed. We also assessed intraoperative and post-operative outcomes among these three groups.

Results

A total of 417 patients were analysed; 40 (9.6%) patients had iPCa, of which 29 (72.5%) and 11 (27.5%) were clinically nonsignificant and significant prostate cancer, respectively. Of all the demographic and preoperative variables analysed, hypertension was significantly associated with overall prostate cancer diagnosis (p < 0.05), and no other variable including patient age, preoperative PSA, PSA density, prostate size, or prior prostate biopsy were associated with increased risk of overall prostate cancer or clinically significant prostate cancer diagnosis. Most cases of iPCa were GG1, and 34 (85%) were managed with active surveillance.

Conclusion

The rate of iPCa after HoLEP was 9.6%, with most cases being GG 1 (72.5%) and managed through active surveillance. Age, prostate size, baseline PSA, and prior negative prostate biopsies were not associated with increased risk of iPCa.

Prostate-specific antigen follow-up and management for patients undergoing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate

OBJECTIVES

To investigate who needs a careful postoperative monitoring for prostate cancer (PCa) after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP). We examined characteristics and oncological outcomes of HoLEP-related PCa.

METHODS

Patients who underwent HoLEP during 2002-2017 in a Japanese tertiary center were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into non-PCa, PCa with HoLEP specimen (PCa-Ope), and PCa diagnosed during follow-up (PCa-Post). Outcomes of all HoLEP-related PCa were monitored.

RESULTS

Of the total 758, 60 (7.9%) were diagnosed with PCa from resected specimen of HoLEP and 9 (1.2%) were diagnosed postoperatively. Preoperative prostate-specific antigen (iPSA), postoperative PSA (pPSA), and PSA density were significantly higher in both PCa groups than those in non-PCa group. While iPSA significantly correlated to prostate volume (PV), pPSA was not associated with PV. A receiver-operating-characteristics curve demonstrated that pPSA 1.2 ng/mL achieved the optimal cut-off (AUC 0.95) for the incidence of PCa-Post. In addition to the incidence of PCa and iPSA, lower enucleation efficiency (enucleated volume /PV) was significantly associated with pPSA >1.2 ng/mL. Among PCa-Ope, 51 were Grade Group (GG) ≤2 and 42 were followed-up with active surveillance, whereas 8 of 9 PCa-Post were GG ≥3 and 2 progressed to death.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing HoLEP are associated with some risk of potential PCa. While oncological outcomes were favorable among PCa-Ope, postoperative PSA should be carefully monitored even if not diagnosed with PCa with HoLEP specimen. Enucleation efficiency should be also considered not to misread pPSA value.

Current Trends in Incidence and Management of T1a and T1b Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer (PCa) identified incidentally (iPCa) after surgical treatment for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) causing lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) is considered low risk by the most current guidelines. Management protocols for iPCa are conservative and are identical to other prostate cancers classified as having favorable prognoses. The objectives of this paper are to discuss the incidence of iPCa stratified by BPH procedure, to highlight predictors of cancer progression, and to propose potential modifications to mainstream guidelines for the optimal management of iPCa. The correlation between the rate of iPCa detection and the method of BPH surgery is not clearly defined. Old age, small prostate volume, and high pre-operative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) are associated with an increased likelihood of detecting iPCa. PSA and tumor grade are strong predictors of cancer progression and can be used along with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and potential confirmatory biopsies to determine disease management. In instances that iPCa requires treatment, radical prostatectomy (RP), radiation therapy, and androgen deprivation therapy all have oncologic benefits but may be associated with increased risk after the BPH surgery. It is advised that patients with low to favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer undergo post-operative PSA measurement and prostate MRI imaging before electing to choose between observation, surveillance without confirmatory biopsy, immediate confirmatory biopsy, or active treatment. Subdividing the binary T1a/b cancer staging into more categories with ranging percentages of malignant tissue would be a helpful first step in tailoring the management of iPCa.

Relationships between holmium laser enucleation of the prostate and prostate cancer

Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is a size-independent surgical option for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) with excellent, durable functional outcomes. The prevalence of LUTS secondary to BPH and prostate cancer both increase with age, although the two diseases develop independently. Urologists often face a diagnostic dilemma, as men with LUTS secondary to BPH might also present with an elevated PSA and, therefore, need a diagnostic work-up to exclude prostate cancer. Nevertheless, ~15% of men with a negative elevated PSA work-up will undergo HoLEP and will be diagnosed with incidental prostate cancer at the time of HoLEP. Indeed, prostate cancer is often found in men undergoing HoLEP, and this situation can be challenging to manage. Variables associated with the detection of incidental prostate cancer, strategies to reduce incidental prostate cancer, as well as the natural history and management of this condition have been extensively studied, but further work in this area is still needed.

Prevalence and risk factors of incidental prostate cancer in certain surgeries for benign prostatic hyperplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to explore the prevalence and clinical risk factors in patients diagnosed with incidental prostate cancer (IPC) during certain surgeries (transurethral resection of the prostate [TURP], open prostatectomy [OP], and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate [HoLEP]) after clinically suspected benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Literature search of the MEDILINE, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was performed to identify eligible studies published before June 2021. Multivariate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the prevalence and clinical risk factors of IPC were calculated using random or fixed-effect models.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were included in the meta-analysis. Amongst the 94.783 patients, IPC was detected in 24.715 (26.1%). Results showed that the chance of IPC detection (10%, 95% CI: 0.07-4.00; P<0.001; I2=97%) in patients treated with TURP is similar to that of patients treated with HoLEP (9%, 95% CI: 0.07-0.11; P<0.001; I2=81.4%). However, the pooled prevalence estimate of patients treated with OP was 11% (95% CI: -0.03-0.25; P=0.113; I2=99.1%) with no statistical significance. We observed increased incidence of IPC diagnosis after BPH surgery amongst patients with higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level (OR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.04-1.23; P=0.004; I2=89%), whereas no effect of age (OR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.97-1.06; P=0.48; I2=78.8%) and prostate volume (OR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.96-1.03; P=0.686; I2=80.5%) were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of IPC was similar amongst patients undergoing TURP, HoLEP, and OP for presumed BPH. Interestingly, increased PSA level was the only independent predictor of increasing risk of IPC after BPH surgery rather than age and prostate volume. Hence, future research should focus on predictors which accurately foretell the progression of prostate cancer to determine the optimal treatment for managing patients with IPC after BPH surgery.

The significance of the extent of tissue embedding for the detection of incidental prostate carcinoma on transurethral prostate resection material: the more, the better?

The aim of this study is to investigate the incidental prostate cancer (iPCa) detection rates of different embedding methods in a large, contemporary cohort of patients with bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) treated with transurethral surgery. We relied on an institutional tertiary-care database to identify BOO patients who underwent either transurethral loop resection or laser (Holmium:yttrium–aluminium garnet) enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) between 01/2012 and 12/2019. Embedding methods differed with regard to the extent of the additional prostate tissue submitted following the first ten cassettes of primary embedding (cohort A: one [additional] cassette/10 g residual tissue vs. cohort B: complete embedding of the residual tissue). Detection rates of iPCa among the different embedding methods were compared. Subsequently, subgroup analyses by embedding protocol were repeated in HoLEP-treated patients only. In the overall cohort, the iPCa detection rate was 11% (46/420). In cohort A (n = 299), tissue embedding resulted in a median of 8 cassettes/patient (range 1–38) vs. a median of 15 (range 2–74) in cohort B (n = 121) (p < .001). The iPCa detection rate was 8% (23/299) and 19% (23/121) in cohort A vs. cohort B, respectively (p < .001). Virtual reduction of the number of tissue cassettes to ten cassettes resulted in a iPCa detection rate of 96% in both cohorts, missing one stage T1a/ISUP grade 1 carcinoma. Increasing the number of cassettes by two and eight cassettes, respectively, resulted in a detection rate of 100% in both cohorts without revealing high-grade carcinomas. Subgroup analyses in HoLEP patients confirmed these findings, demonstrated by a 100 vs. 96% iPCa detection rate following examination of the first ten cassettes, missing one case of T1a/ISUP 1. Examination of 8 additional cassettes resulted in a 100% detection rate. The extent of embedding of material obtained from transurethral prostate resection correlates with the iPCa detection rate. However, the submission of 10 cassettes appears to be a reasonable threshold to reduce resource utilization while maintaining secure cancer detection.

Is the systematic histological analysis of benign prostatic hyperplasia surgical specimen always necessary?

INTRODUCTION

After most surgical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), the resected tissue undergoes a histological examination. This examination is performed for the risk of finding an incidental prostate cancer (iPCa). The improvement of prostate cancer detection in the past few years decreased the global iPCa rate. This raises the question of the real benefit for all patients of a systematic histological analysis. The aim of our study was to evaluate the iPCa detection rate on a large contemporary cohort of patients treated for BPH, and to define predictive factors of iPCa detection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the medical charts of all consecutive patients who underwent surgical treatment for BPH in our academic center from 2012 to 2018. Patients with prostate cancer diagnosed before surgery were not included. All the resected tissue underwent standard histopathological examination. iPCa was defined by any grade or stage of prostate cancer identified on the resected tissue by the histological examination. The following variables were analyzed using an uni- and multi-variable logistic regression as potential risk factors of iPCa: age, total PSA, PSA density (PSAd), prostate volume, technique used, weight of resected tissue and use of 5ARI medication.

RESULTS

1045 patients were included in the study. Of them, 439 (42.0%), 206 (19.7%) and 400 (38.3%) underwent HoLEP, OP and TURP, respectively. iPCa was diagnosed in 94 (9.0%) of the 1045. Among them 15 (1.4%) were clinically significant (ISUP score ≥ 2). The multivariable logistic regression analysis identified age (p = 0.03) and PSA density (p < 0.001) as independent predictive factors for the detection of iPCa. Using the median of age and PSAd, we identified a population with 0% of iPCa in our cohort (age < 70 year-old and PSAd < 0.05 ng/mL/mL).

CONCLUSION

The global iPCa rate was 9% in this contemporary large cohort of patients who underwent surgical treatment for BPH, with 1.4% of clinically significant cancer. Age and PSAd were independent predictive factors to find iPCa. Patients younger than 70 with a PSAd < 0.05 ng/mL/mL had 0% of iPCA in our cohort. In this specific population, we could probably avoid a systematical histological examination of the resected tissue.

Incidental prostate cancer after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: incidence and predictive factors for clinical progression

OBJECTIVES

To describe the incidental prostate cancer (iPCa) rate and identify predictive factors for PCa progression after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP).

METHODS

A retrospective review of all iPCa cases diagnosed after HoLEP procedures between April 2012 and May 2020 was conducted. iPCa was defined as a symptom-free cancer diagnosed after HoLEP in patients without any diagnosis or suspicion of PCa before surgical treatment. PCa progression was suspected by rise in PSA from baseline after HoLEP and confirmed by progressive disease detected on transrectal needle biopsy or by the appearance of metastatic disease. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to identify predictive factors for cancer progression.

RESULTS

The iPCa rate in our cohort was 10.7% (n = 134). Among patients with iPCa, 25 (18.6%) progressed with a mean follow-up of 32 months. Regarding predictive factors, post-operative PSA (OR 2.35, p < 0.001) was significantly associated with PCa progression in multivariate analysis. The cutoff value for post-operative PSA was determined at 2 ng/mL. Among iPCa cases, 14 patients (10.4%) had both T1b stage disease and PSA ≥ 2 ng/mL, while 68 (50.7%) had neither of these factors. Univariate logistic regression analysis showed that patients with both factors had the highest risk of progression (OR 49.4; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In this study, post-operative PSA above 2 ng/mL was the only independent risk factor for iPCa progression after HoLEP. Patients with post-operative PSA ≥ 2 ng/mL must be considered to be at risk of progression and may require early curative treatment or closer follow-up in the post-operative period, especially when this is associated with T1b stage disease.

Incidental prostate cancer after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate-A narrative review

Prostate cancer can be detected incidentally after surgical therapy for benign prostatic obstruction such as holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), thus called incidental prostate cancer (iPCa). We aimed to review the studies on iPCa detected after HoLEP and investigate its prevalence. A detailed search of original articles was conducted via the PubMed-MEDLINE, Web of Science, Wiley Online Library and Cochrane Library databases in the last 10 years up to 1 May 2021 with the following search string solely or in combination: "prostate cancer", "prostate carcinoma", "holmium laser enucleation of the prostate" and "HoLEP". We identified 19 articles to include in our analysis and divided them into six main categories: HoLEP versus open prostatectomy and/or transurethral resection of the prostate in terms of iPCa, oncological and functional outcomes, the role of imaging modalities in detecting iPCa, predictive factors of iPCa, the role of prostate-specific antigen kinetics in detecting iPCa and the management of iPCa after HoLEP. We found that the iPCa after HoLEP rate ranges from 5.64% to 23.3%. Functional and oncological outcomes were reported to be encouraging. Oncological treatment options are available in a wide range.

Use of Laser Technologies in Oncourology

Due to the increasing use of laser technologies in oncourology,we consider it relevant to publish a review of domesticand foreign articles for 2015-2021. The range of application ofvarious lasers in oncourology is very wide (holmium (Ho): YAG,thulium (Tm): YAG, etc.). In comparison with traditional surgicalinterventions, the greatest effectiveness of laser technologies incombination with endoscopy is clearly traced, the risks of intra –and postoperative complications are minimized, the period ofinpatient stay for patients changes.

Benign prostate hyperplasia as a potential protective factor against prostate cancer: Insights from a magnetic resonance imaging study of compositional characteristics

PURPOSE

The structural relationship between benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) and prostate cancer (Pca) is controversial. The purpose of our study was to examine the association between quantitative prostate compositional metrics by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and Pca.

METHODS

We identified 405 patients who underwent prostate MRI and biopsy and/or prostatectomy from January 2019 to January 2021 at our institution. Segmentation volumetric methods were used to assess central gland (CG) and peripheral zone (PZ) volume. PZ mean thickness and mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), marker of underlying histologic components, were measured. Multivariable logistic regression was performed with outcomes of ≥Grade Group (GG) 2 Pca and for multifocal disease.

RESULTS

On multivariable analysis, higher CG volumes were at lower odds of ≥GG2 disease (n = 227) (OR: 0.97, 95% CI 0.96-0.98, p < 0.0001), taking into account PZ volume (p = 0.18) and thickness (p = 0.70). For every one cc increase in CG volume, there was an approximately 3% decrease in odds of ≥GG2 disease. Similar findings were noted for multifocal disease (n = 180) (OR: 0.97, 95% CI 0.96-0.98, p < 0.0001). Notably, ADC of the normal PZ was not significantly associated with CG volume (p = 0.21) nor a predictor of disease (p = 0.49).

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing central gland volume, driven by BPH, is associated with lower odds of significant Pca, including multifocal disease, while PZ anatomic and histologic surrogate changes were noncontributory. Findings support BPH impediment of global tumor growth predicted by theoretical mechanobiological model. This potential stabilizing factor should be further studied for risk stratification and in consideration for BPH therapy.

MRI Evaluation of Patients Before and After Interventions for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: An Update

Transurethral resection of the prostate is the most commonly performed procedure for the management of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms attributed to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). However, in recent years, various minimally invasive surgical therapies have been introduced to treat BPH. These include laser-based procedures such as holmium laser enucleation of the prostate and photoselective vaporization of the prostate as well as thermal ablation procedures such as water vapor thermal therapy (Rezūm), all of which result in volume reduction of periurethral prostatic tissue. In comparison, a permanent metallic device (UroLift) can be implanted to pull open the prostatic urethra without an associated decrease in prostate size, and selective catheter-directed prostate artery embolization results in a global decrease in prostate size. The goal of this article is to familiarize radiologists with the underlying anatomic changes that occur in BPH as visualized on MRI and to describe the appearance of the prostate on MRI performed after these procedures. Complications encountered on imaging after these procedures are also discussed. Although MRI is not currently used in the routine preprocedural evaluation of BPH, emerging data support a role for MRI in predicting postprocedure outcomes.

Incidence, predictive factors and oncological outcomes of incidental prostate cancer after endoscopic enucleation of the prostate: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

This systematic review aims at reporting the incidence, predictive factors, and the oncological outcomes of incidental prostate cancer (IPCa) in men who underwent endoscopic enucleation of prostate (EEP).

METHODS

A literature search was performed using the following Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms and keywords: "Prostatic Neoplasms", "Prostate Cancer", "Transurethral Resection of Prostate", "Prostate resection", "Prostate enucleation". Meta-analysis was performed if there were two or more studies reporting the same outcome under the same definition. In case of insufficient data, results were presented in a narrative manner.

RESULTS

Sixty-one studies were included in qualitative synthesis and 55 were included in meta-analysis. The pooled IPCa rate was 0.08 (95% CI 0.073-0.088). Increasing age, higher preoperative serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, higher preoperative PSA density (PSAD), smaller prostate volume, higher postoperative PSA velocity and lower enucleated prostate weight, were reported to have significant correlation with IPCa. In BPH patients, the mean pre-operative and post-operative PSA levels were 5.58 ± 1.48 ng/dL and 1.06 ± 0.27 ng/dL, respectively. In patients with IPCa, the mean pre-operative and post-operative PSA levels were 7.72 ± 2.90 ng/dL and 2.77 ± 1.66 ng/dL, respectively. The mean percentage PSA reduction was 82.0% ± 1.8% for BPH patients and 68.2% ± 12.1% for IPCa patients. IPCa was most commonly managed by active surveillance (68.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

The pooled incidence of IPCa after EEP was 8%. An absolute post-operative PSA level of < 2.0 and a percentage PSA reduction of > 70% should be expected in BPH patients after EEP.

The significance of a high preoperative PSA level for the detection of incidental prostate cancer in LUTS patients with large prostates

PURPOSE

To evaluate the diagnostic value of a high preoperative PSA level for the detection of incidental prostate cancer (iPCa) in LUTS patients with very large prostates (> 100 cc).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 1125 men treated for LUTS with holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP). Patients were stratified according to a preoperative PSA level higher (high PSA; n = 365) or lower than 10 ng/ml (low PSA; n = 760). Preoperative and histopathological parameters were compared between both cohorts. Logistic regression models were used to identify independent predictors of iPCa.

RESULTS

Demographic parameters were similar between both cohorts. The median PSA levels were 14.2 ng/ml (11.5-19.9) and 4 ng/ml (2.4-6.0). The prostate volume was significantly higher in the high PSA group (105 cc vs. 75 cc; p < 0.001). Correspondingly, the PSA density was significantly increased in the high PSA cohort compared to the low PSA cohort (0.14 vs. 0.05; p < 0.001). The overall detection rate of iPCa showed no difference between groups (9.5% vs. 9.9%). More preoperative prostate biopsies were performed in the high PSA group compared to the low PSA group (46.8% vs. 17.6%; p < 0.001). However, the rate of false negative results was comparable between groups (12.7% vs. 11.1%; p = 0.726). In logistic regression models all PSA-related parameters failed to predict iPCa.

CONCLUSIONS

PSA-guided approaches to predict iPCa in LUTS patients with very large prostates are not accurate. This finding is useful in clinical practice for counselling our patients and to prevent unwarranted diagnostic procedures.

HoLEP after prostate biopsy: does it have any impact?

PURPOSE

Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) has recently become the recommended treatment for prostate in all sizes in benign prostate hyperplasia surgery. A recent prostate biopsy performed prior to the HoLEP procedure can make surgeons concerned about the surgery. We aimed to investigate the per- and postoperative outcomes of the HoLEP procedure in patients who underwent prostate biopsy and to evaluate the most appropriate surgery time after biopsy.

METHODS

The data of 160 patients who underwent HoLEP by a single surgeon between March 2017 and December 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into two groups, Group 1 consisted of 80 patients without prostate biopsy and Group 2 consisted of 80 patients with prior prostate biopsy. All HOLEP procedures in group 2 were performed at least 2 weeks following biopsy. Per- and postoperative outcomes, complications were evaluated.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between groups in terms of by enucleation time, efficiency of laser, efficiency of enucleation, hospitalization time, and catheterization removal time. Only morcellation time was shorter in biopsy naïve patients. There were no statistical differences in postoperative outcomes. Previous prostate biopsy did not affect the continence status in our study group. There were not any Clavien grade 4 or higher complications. Urinary tract infection was higher in early post-biopsy period, there was no difference among the groups. CONCLUSıON: Our study confirms that HoLEP is a safe and efficient surgical procedure for the patients with prior prostate biopsy. We believe that it can be safely performed 2nd week following prostate biopsy.

Informative value of histological assessment of tissue acquired during aquablation of the prostate

PURPOSE

To determine the histological validity of the tissue acquired during aquablation of the prostate.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Prostatic tissue of 12 patients that consecutively underwent aquablation for benign prostatic enlargement was systematically examined. Histological examination was performed by two experienced uropathologists using a digital slide scanner and slide viewer software (Pannoramic 250 and Case Viewer 2.3, 3D Histech, Hungary). The surface areas of the assessable glands were examined and set in relation to the total surface area of the material available for histology and to the patient's total prostate volume. Examinations were performed analogously in ten consecutive patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) to facilitate interpretation of the results. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

A median of 4.06% (range 1.43-7.5%) of the preoperative total prostate volume (median 64.5 ml (range 40-80 ml)) was obtained for histological examination by aquablation. Due to severe mechanical destruction and fragmentation, only a proportion of 0.43% (0.06-1.79%) of this tissue represented histologically assessable glands. Therefore, roughly 0.017% of the total prostatic volume was available for a reliable histological examination. In comparison, 32.5% (6.67-37.5%) of the total prostate volume was removed by TURP and 22.86% (7.45-40.57%) of this tissue represented informative prostatic glands, corresponding to 7.43% of the total prostate volume.

CONCLUSION

Histological significance of the tissue obtained by aquablation of the prostate is very limited. Costs and effort of the histological examination must, therefore, be weighed critically against the limited informative value.

The diagnostic value of prostate cancer between holmium laser enucleation of the prostate and transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia: A retrospective comparative study

BACKGROUND

To compare the diagnostic value of prostate cancer (PCa) between holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 2909 patients who underwent surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) from January 2008 to June 2018. A total of 1362 patients received HoLEP, and 1547 patients received TURP. The baseline patient characteristics were collected. We then compared the perioperative outcomes of these patients who diagnosed with incidentally diagnosed prostatic carcinoma (IDPC) or PCa after BPH surgeries.

RESULTS

The total detection rate of PCa in HoLEP group was higher than that in TURP group (85/6.24% vs. 61/3.94%, p = 0.005). Specifically, 55(4.6%) patients were diagnosed with IDPC in HoLEP group with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) less than 4 ng/ml, and 37(2.7%) patients in TURP group (p = 0.014). For the patients with PSA between 4 and 10 ng/ml, 15(13.9%) patients were diagnosed with PCa after HoLEP, and 6(5.0%) patients after TURP (p = 0.023). But the detection rate of PCa was not significantly different between the two groups when PSA was over 10 ng/ml. On the other hand, 57 in 1215 patients with no prostate biopsy preoperatively were diagnosed with PCa after HoLEP, while 42 in 1370 patients after TURP (4.7% vs. 3.1%, p = 0.040), respectively. Twenty-six patients received once biopsy and diagnosed with PCa in HoLEP group, while 15 patients in TURP group (18.4% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.018), respectively. However, no significant difference was observed for patients who received twice prostate biopsy in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study showed that HoLEP can provide a higher total detection rate of PCa when compared with TURP. Besides, this superiority was especially embodied in patients with PSA less than 10 ng/ml.

Comparative Study of the Effectiveness and Safety of Transurethral Bipolar Plasmakinetic Enucleation of the Prostate and Transurethral Bipolar Plasmakinetic Resection of the Prostate for Massive Benign Prostate Hyperplasia (>80 ml)

Background

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical safety and effectiveness of transurethral bipolar plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate (PKEP) vs. transurethral bipolar plasmakinetic resection of the prostate (PKRP) in the treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) more than 80 ml.

Material/Methods

From June 2015 to February 2019, 179 BPH patients with prostate volume greater than 80 ml were enrolled and separated into a PKEP (n=81) group and a PKRP group (n=98). The patients in the 2 groups were followed up for 6 months. We collected and analyzed data from the international Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), residual urine volume (RUV), quality of life (QOL), maximum urine flow rate (Qmax), and international erectile function index (ILEF-5). The clinical data collected during and after the operation and surgical complications were compared between the 2 groups.

Results

The PKEP group had significantly shorter operation time, bladder flushing time, indwelling catheter time, and hospitalization time, and has less intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative blood transfusion, postoperative secondary hemorrhage, bladder neck contracture, capsule perforation, and retrograde ejaculation (P<0.05). Compared with the PKRP group, the postoperative IPSS and QOL scores were significantly lower in the PKEP group (P<0.05), while the excision glandular tissue weight and Qmax were significantly improved (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in ILEF-5 scores, RUV, urethral stricture, urinary incontinence, or erectile dysfunction between the 2 groups (p>0.05).

Conclusions

PKEP treatment of BPH with a large volume (>80 ml) has the advantages of complete gland resection, good surgical effect, improved surgical safety, and reduced intraoperative and postoperative complications.

Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy in Patients with a History of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate: The Indiana University Experience

Introduction: We sought to update our experience of oncologic and functional outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) for prostate cancer in patients with history of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP). Patients and Methods: Twenty-seven patients with previous HoLEP who underwent RARP were matched 1:1 with RARP patients with no history of transurethral surgery. Demographic, operative, oncologic, continence, and erectile function outcomes were analyzed. Results: Median time between HoLEP and RARP was 31 months with a mean prostate-specific antigen doubling time of 4.28 ng/mL/year. Operative times were significantly longer with higher bladder neck reconstruction rates and similarly low complication rates. Biochemical recurrence was relatively low (7%) in the HoLEP group, identical to the comparative group. Continence at last follow-up was not statistically significant between groups, although time to continence favored the non-HoLEP cohort. Erectile function recovery was generally poor in the post-HoLEP cohort (11%), although bilateral nerve sparing was rarely performed (11%). Compared with our initial experience, there were significant improvements in time to continence (16 vs 36 weeks). No T2 post-HoLEP RARP since 2010 has had a positive surgical margin. Conclusions: Post-HoLEP prostatectomy remains feasible with similar perioperative and oncologic outcomes compared with matched cohorts. Functional recovery remains slowed yet may continue to improve with technical familiarity.

Can preoperative multiparametric MRI avoid unnecessary prostate biopsies before holmium laser enucleation of the prostate? Preliminary results of a multicentric cohort of patients

BACKGROUND

Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is a surgical technique that allows to safely and effectively treat bladder outlet obstruction due to benign prostate enlargement and retrieve an adequate surgical specimen. We investigated the role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate (mpMRI) as a tool to exclude incidental prostate cancer (iPCa) and to compare mpMRI alone with a contextual transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy (TRUS-GB).

METHODS

Retrospective multicentric evaluation of 244 patients underwent to HoLEP with a suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa) due to raised PSA and/or abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) and a negative mpMRI (PI-RADS score <3), was performed. Of these, 118 patients had only a negative mpMRI (MRI group) while 126 had a negative mpMRI and a contextual preoperative negative TRUS-GB (MRI + TRUS-GB group). Comparison between the two groups, univariate and multivariate analysis were conducted in order to identify any predictive factors of iPCa.

RESULTS

Median age, PSA, prostate volume and PSA density were 64.0 years (IQR: 58.0-69.0), 6.10 ng/mL (IQR: 4.76-9.65), 86.0 cc (IQR: 65.0-115.0), 50.0 cc (IQR: 37.5-80.0) and 0.08 ng/mL/cc (IQR: 0.06-0.10), respectively. In surgical specimen, iPCa was detected in 21 cases (8.8%). No statistically differences between MRI and MRI + TRUS-GB group were found in terms of iPCa (7.6% and 8.5%, respectively), pathological T stage and ISUP Grade Group. A contextual TRUS-GB added to mpMRI did not correlate to iPCa either at uni- and multivariate analysis while a significant correlation of a PSA density >0.15 ng/mL/cc was found only at univariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Including a mpMRI in clinical evaluation of patients eligible to HoLEP with a preoperative PCa suspicion leads to low the rates of iPCa and might avoid unnecessary TRUS-GB.

Accuracy of the preoperative PSA level for predicting clinically significant incidental transitional zone-prostate cancer before endoscopic enucleation of very large adenoma

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the accuracy of high preoperative PSA levels for predicting transitional zone incidental PCa (TZ-PCa) in men with very large prostates.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Perioperative data from 375 consecutive patients who underwent endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) for benign prostatic obstruction between July 2013 and December 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were stratified into three groups according to the preoperative PSA level: low-PSA (< 4 ng/mL), intermediate-PSA (4 ≤ PSA < 10 ng/mL) and high-PSA (≥ 10 ng/mL). Men in each group were propensity score matched by age, 5α-reductase inhibitor (5-ARI) use, prostate volume and mpMRI. The TZ-PCa incidence rate was retrospectively compared by preoperative PSA level in a propensity score model including all predetermined variables.

RESULTS

Age, prostate volume, 5-ARI use were similar between patient groups. The median PSA levels in the low-, intermediate- and high-PSA groups were 3 [2.3; 3.4], 6.6 [5.3; 8.1] and 12.7 [11; 16.7] ng/mL, respectively. The median prostate volume was > 100 grams in all groups (108, 105 and 120 cc, respectively). The T1a-Gleason 6 incidental TZ-PCa rate was statistically comparable between the three groups (3.4, 5.1 and 8.6% in the low-, intermediate- and high-PSA groups, respectively). The detection rate of clinically significant TZ-PCa was low for preoperative PSA levels > 4 ng/mL (1.7%); with no difference between the intermediate- and high-PSA groups.

CONCLUSION

In men with large glands, the clinically significant incidental TZ-PCa detection rate was similar regardless of the preoperative PSA level stratum. Such details may help with patient counselling during BPH surgical management.

Preoperative multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging: a safe clinical practice to reduce incidental prostate cancer in Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate

Introduction

Purpose of the study was to investigate the correlation of a preoperative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate (mpMRI) in patients with a suspicion of prostate cancer and eligible for Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP).

Material and methods

Data of 228 patients who had undergone HoLEP was selected and retrospectively analyzed from a multicentric database. All patients presented with a raised serum PSA and/or an abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE). Prostate cancer (PCa) was excluded either with a negative mpMRI (group ‘NEGATIVE MRI’ n = 113) or a standard biopsy (group ‘NO MRI’ n = 115). Preoperative characteristic surgical and histological outcomes were confronted. A univariate and multivariate logistic regression model was performed to investigate independent predictors of incidental Prostate Cancer (iPCa).

Results

Both groups presented with no statistical differences in preoperative characteristics besides previous acute urinary retention rates and post-voided residual volume, found to be higher (27.8% vs. 14.2% and median 120cc vs. 80cc) in NO MRI and NEGATIVE MRI respectively.

No differences were registered in surgical time, removed tissue, catheterization time, hospital stay and complications rate.

Statistically lower rate of iPCa (p = 0.03) was detected in the NEGATIVE MRI group (6.2%) in comparison with NO MRI group (14.8%). In multivariate logistic regression only presence of a preoperative negative mpMRI correlated (p = 0.04) as an independent predictive factor (OR 2.63; 95% CI: 1.02–6.75).

Conclusions

A negative mpMRI might be a useful tool to be included in a novel preoperative assessment to patients eligible for HoLEP with a suspicion of PCa in order to avoid an incidental PCa.

Does mechanical morcellation of large glands compromise incidental prostate cancer detection on specimen analysis? A pathological comparison with open simple prostatectomy

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to compare the incidental prostate cancer (iPCa) detection rate between pathological specimens from green laser enucleation of the prostate (GreenLEP) and open simple prostatectomy (OSP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In two institutions, the charts of all consecutive patients who underwent OSP between January 2005 and December 2010 were retrospectively reviewed, and the data of all consecutive patients who underwent GreenLEP with tissue morcellation between July 2013 and January 2018 were also collected. Preoperative demographics and pathological findings were recorded. iPCa detection rate was retrospectively compared between the GreenLEP and OSP groups in a propensity score model, including all predetermined variables: Age, preoperative PSA level and prostate volume.

RESULTS

Of 738 patients, 402 were included in the propensity-score matching analysis, and they were equally distributed among groups. The overall iPCa detection rates were similar in both groups (9.9% vs. 8.5%; p = 0.73), and there were no statistically significant differences in terms of tumour stage, Gleason score or the rate of clinically significant iPCa, although the number of cassettes analysed was significantly higher in the morcellation group than in the OSP group. No predictive factors for iPCa were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present study suggest that the mechanical morcellation of large glands had no influence on iPCa detection. Compared with a specimen from standard OSP, a large morcellated tissue sample allows adequate pathological evaluation and does not alter a pathologist's ability to detect iPCa.

Temporal Trend in Incidental Prostate Cancer Detection at Surgery for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

OBJECTIVE

To assess changes in the rate of incidental prostate cancer (PCa) after benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) surgery over the last decade.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We identified 1177 patients surgically treated for BPH (open prostatectomy, transurethral resection or holmium laser enucleation [HoLEP] of the prostate) in 2007-2016 at a single European academic center. Local polynomial regression was used to explore changes in the rate of incidental PCa detected after BPH surgery and of preoperative biopsy performed over time. Logistic regression analyses tested the association of incidental PCa diagnosis with year of surgery and preoperative biopsy.

RESULTS

Incidental PCa was found in 6.4% (74) of cases, 67 (91%) with Grade group 1 disease. We observed an increased incidence of PCa diagnosis after BPH surgery over time (odds ratio [OR]: 1.12; 95%confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.24, P = .02) along with a concomitant decrease in the rate of preoperative prostate biopsies (OR: 0.83; 95%CI: 0.79-0.88, P < .0001). Patients undergoing a preoperative biopsy showed a lower risk of being diagnosed with PCa after surgery (OR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.12, 0.72 P = .007). Patients treated with HoLEP had a higher chance of incidental PCa detection (OR: 2.28; 95%CI: 1.30-4.00; P = .004), although this may be related to the significantly higher number of HoLEP performed over the last years.

CONCLUSION

The increased rate of low-risk PCa detected after BPH surgery in the last decade reflects the clinical practice changes in PCa screening and diagnosis leading to a reduced number of unnecessary biopsies and indolent cancer diagnosis.