BJU international
-
Percutaneous cryoablation of renal masses: Washington University experience of treating 129 tumours.
WHAT'S KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT? AND WHAT DOES THE STUDY ADD?: For patients who are unfit for extirpative surgery, percutaneous cryoablation (PCA) presents a minimally-invasive alternative for the treatment of renal masses. PCA has been demonstrated to be safe, with complication rates <10% being reported consistently. Studies have suggested that a minimal and insignificant decline in renal function can occur after PCA. Finally, among studies with a follow-up >20 months, treatment success rates range from 75% to 96%. However, longer-term oncological and functional results for patients treated with PCA are relatively limited. The present study profiles one of the largest reported experiences with PCA for renal masses: 129 tumours in 124 patients. Our complication rate was comparable to that observed in other reported studies. At a mean follow-up of 30 months, treatment success was achieved in 87% of tumours, which is in line with published PCA success rates. On multivariable analysis, tumour size >3.0 cm was found to be significantly associated with treatment failure. A minimal but statistically significant renal functional decline was observed, with 20% of patients experiencing a progression in National Kidney Foundation-Chronic Kidney Disease stage. On multivariable analysis, age >70 years, hilar tumour location and postoperative day 1 estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) were found to be significantly associated with renal functional decline. The present study confirms that PCA of renal masses represents a safe alternative to surgery in patients with substantial medical comorbidities. In the present cohort, baseline patient and tumour characteristics probably impact the risk of tumour recurrence, as well as renal disease progression, after PCA. ⋯ PCA provides a safe and oncologically effective alternative to extirpative surgery for renal masses in patients with significant medical comorbidities.
-
WHAT'S KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT? AND WHAT DOES THE STUDY ADD?: Active surveillance has been widely accepted as a treatment tool for low-risk prostate cancer, and use of the Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria can select smaller and less aggressive tumours in low-risk disease. The study shows the pathological outcomes of radical prostatectomy for patients with low-risk disease who met the PRIAS criteria. It found that ~20% had unfavourable pathological features and only 30% satisfied insignificant cancer criteria with pT2 stage, a Gleason score ≤6 and tumour volume <2.5 mL. It concludes that close follow-up including repeat biopsy or MRI is necessary to minimize unexpected progression of disease. ⋯ Although use of the PRIAS criteria could select more favourable tumours even in low-risk prostate cancer, about one in five men had unfavourable pathological outcomes and only three in ten had insignificant cancer. Close and careful follow-up is necessary to avoid misclassification or progression of disease, especially during the first few years of active surveillance.
-
Comparative Study
Radical prostatectomy represents an effective treatment in patients with specimen-confined high pathological Gleason score prostate cancer.
WHAT'S KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT? AND WHAT DOES THE STUDY ADD?: To date, only a few studies have addressed the long-term oncological outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with pathological Gleason score ≥ 8 prostate cancer. According to these reports, some individuals with pathological Gleason score ≥ 8 may benefit from RP, with cancer-control outcomes comparable with those of patients with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. The presence of pathological Gleason score 8-10 represents a poor prognostic factor in the outcome of men with prostate cancer. However, in patients with specimen-confined disease, RP and bilateral PLND provided long-term cancer-control outcomes similar to those of patients with more favourable disease characteristics. ⋯ Presence of high Gleason score at RP represents a poor prognostic factor in the outcome of patients with prostate cancer. However, RP provides excellent long-term cancer control outcomes in the subset of patients with specimen-confined disease.