Prospective comparison of scar-related satisfaction and quality of life after laparoscopic versus open radical prostatectomy: no differences from patients’ point of view

Who Can Avoid Systematic Biopsy Without Missing Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Men Who Undergo Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy?

BACKGROUND

The objective of the study was to identify a subset of men who can avoid systematic multisite biopsy (SyB) among those undergoing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted transperineal 4-core biopsy (TgB) without missing clinically significant cancer (SC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From April 2013 to December 2017, 304 men with elevated prostate-specific antigen levels (< 20 ng/mL) or abnormal digital rectal examination and positive MRI findings underwent transrecta ultrasound and MRI-targeted transperineal 4-core with 14-core systematic biopsy. MRI findings were prospectively collected and evaluated using Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS), and scores ≥3 were considered positive. SC was defined as Gleason score ≥3 + 4 or maximum cancer length ≥5 mm. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of TgB and SyB to detect SC and characterized men who could avoid SyB without missing SC.

RESULTS

Detection rates of any cancer and SC for TgB/SyB/their combination were 59%/63%/68% and 51%/52%/61%, respectively. TgB alone missed 14% (29/207) of any cancer and 16% (29/184) of SC detected using TgB with SyB. In uni- and multivariable analyses, PI-RADS scores of 3 to 4 were independent predictors for missing SC using TgB alone. When restricted to 81 men with PI-RADS scores of 5 (27%), SC was missed using TgB alone only in 3 (4.6% vs. 22% for the remaining 223 men; P = .007).

CONCLUSION

SC was missed using TgB alone in a non-negligible proportion of men who underwent TgB and SyB. SyB might be safely avoided in men with PI-RADS score 5 lesions with reduced risks of missing SC.

Parent and patient perceptions of robotic vs open urological surgery scars in children

PURPOSE

Cumulative evidence shows that robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery is safe and at least as efficacious as open surgery for several pediatric urological procedures. Scars resulting from robotic surgery are often assumed to have a cosmetic advantage. However, no study has clearly demonstrated that parents and patients consistently prefer such scars.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We developed 3 distinct surveys consisting of photographs and diagrams of scars resulting from open and robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery for ureteral reimplantation, pyeloplasty and bladder augmentation. Surveys were distributed to parents of patients being evaluated for 1 of the 3 procedures. The surveys evaluated information such as scar preference, reason for preference and demographics. Patients older than 7 years also completed surveys.

RESULTS

Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgical scars were preferred by parents for all procedures studied (85% for ureteral reimplant, 63% for pyeloplasty and 93% for bladder augmentation). Patients also preferred the robotic scars (76%, 62% and 91%, respectively). Patients and parents did not differ significantly in scar preference or in rating of factors affecting decision. Scar size was important or very important to 80% of parents for reimplant, 83% for pyeloplasty and 86% for bladder augmentation. However, the majority of parents would ultimately base their choice of surgical approach on clinical efficacy rather than scar preference.

CONCLUSIONS

Parents and patients prefer robot-assisted laparoscopic surgical scars to open surgical scars for pediatric ureteral reimplantation, pyeloplasty and bladder augmentation. Scar appearance is an important influence on the decisions of parents and patients, and should be discussed when surgical treatment is presented.