1
|
Dinneen E, Almeida-Magana R, Al-Hammouri T, Fernandes I, Mayor N, Mendes L, Winkler M, Silvanto A, Haider A, Freeman A, Shaw G. Intraoperative margin assessment during radical prostatectomy: is microscopy frozen in time or ready for digital defrost? Histopathology 2024; 85:716-726. [PMID: 39104212 DOI: 10.1111/his.15290] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/07/2024]
Abstract
Intraoperative frozen section (IFS) is used with the intention to improve functional and oncological outcomes for patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP). High resource requirements of IFS techniques such as NeuroSAFE may preclude widespread adoption, even if there are benefits to patients. Recent advances in fresh-tissue microscopic digital imaging technologies may offer an attractive alternative, and there is a growing body of evidence regarding these technologies. In this narrative review, we discuss some of the familiar limitations of IFS and compare these to the attractive counterpoints of modern digital imaging technologies such as the speed and ease of image generation, the locality of equipment within (or near) the operating room, the ability to maintain tissue integrity, and digital transfer of images. Confocal laser microscopy (CLM) is the modality most frequently reported in the literature for margin assessment during RP. We discuss several imitations and obstacles to widespread dissemination of digital imaging technologies. Among these, we consider how the 'en-face' margin perspective will challenge urologists and pathologists to understand afresh the meaning of positive margin significance. As a part of this, discussions on how to describe, categorize, react to, and evaluate these technologies are needed to improve patient outcomes. Limitations of this review include its narrative structure and that the evidence base in this field is relatively immature but developing at pace.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eoin Dinneen
- Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK
- Department of Urology, Westmoreland Street Hospital, University College Hospital London, London, UK
| | - Ricardo Almeida-Magana
- Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK
- Department of Urology, Westmoreland Street Hospital, University College Hospital London, London, UK
| | - Tarek Al-Hammouri
- Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - Iona Fernandes
- Department of Urology, Westmoreland Street Hospital, University College Hospital London, London, UK
| | - Nikhil Mayor
- Department of Urology, Imperial College NHS Healthcare Trust, Charing Cross Hospital, London, UK
- Imperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Larissa Mendes
- Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital London, London, UK
| | - Mathias Winkler
- Department of Urology, Imperial College NHS Healthcare Trust, Charing Cross Hospital, London, UK
- Imperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Anna Silvanto
- Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital London, London, UK
| | - Aiman Haider
- Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital London, London, UK
| | - Alex Freeman
- Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital London, London, UK
| | - Greg Shaw
- Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK
- Department of Urology, Westmoreland Street Hospital, University College Hospital London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wu K, Liu X, Tang Y, Wang X, Li X. Clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes of prostate cancer incidentally discovered at the time of radical cystoprostatectomy: a population-based cohort study. Int J Surg 2024; 110:4023-4030. [PMID: 38537072 PMCID: PMC11254266 DOI: 10.1097/js9.0000000000001401] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2023] [Accepted: 03/11/2024] [Indexed: 07/19/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to comprehensively analyze the clinical characteristics and prognosis of patients with concomitant bladder cancer (BCa) and prostate cancer (PCa) using a large population-based database. METHODS Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (2000-2019), the authors identified patient with concomitant PCa at the time of radical cystoprostatectomy (RCP). Logistic regression and propensity score matching (PSM) analyses were employed to identify risk factors and mitigate confounders, respectively. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to estimate cancer-specific survival (CSS). RESULTS A total of 14 199 BCa patients undergoing RCP were identified, with 28.8% incidentally discovered to have concurrent PCa. Among them, 89.9% exhibited organ-confined (T1-2) PCa. An increased risk of concomitant tumors was observed among older age, white race, and high tumor grade of BCa. Survival analysis revealed no significant difference in CSS between patients with BCa alone and those with concurrent PCa (5-year CSS rate: 71.3 vs. 67.2%, P =0.076). Subgroup analysis and multivariable analysis, however, indicated that concurrent high-risk PCa adversely impacted survival (5-year CSS rate: 71.3 vs. 63.4%, HR 1.27, 95% CI: 1.01-1.58, P =0.038) compared to solitary BCa. Notably, the presence of low/intermediate-risk PCa did not affect survival outcomes ( P =0.584). CONCLUSION In conclusion, incidentally discovered PCa in RCP specimens is frequent and characterized by organ-confined presentation, lower PSA levels, and Gleason scores. Patients with concurrent high-risk PCa have a worse prognosis compared to those with solitary BCa, while the presence of low/intermediate-risk PCa does not influence oncological prognosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kan Wu
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University
| | - Xu Liu
- Breast Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Sichuan, People’s Republic of China
| | - Yaxiong Tang
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University
| | - Xianding Wang
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University
| | - Xiang Li
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Korpás KL, Beke L, Varga D, Bidiga L, Méhes G, Molnár S. Grade Group accuracy is improved by extensive prostate biopsy sampling, but unrelated to prostatectomy specimen sampling or use of immunohistochemistry. Pathol Oncol Res 2023; 29:1611157. [PMID: 37415848 PMCID: PMC10319996 DOI: 10.3389/pore.2023.1611157] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2023] [Accepted: 06/12/2023] [Indexed: 07/08/2023]
Abstract
Assessing the accurate Grade Group of a prostate needle biopsy specimen is essential for choosing the adequate therapeutic modality for prostate cancer patients. However, it is well-known that biopsy Grade Group tends to up- or downgrade significantly at radical prostatectomy. We aimed to investigate the correlation between accuracy and biopsy core number, performed immunohistochemical staining (IHC) or prostatectomy specimen sampling, with the latest also being correlated with higher detection rates of adverse pathological features, e.g., positive surgical margins, higher pathological stage or presence of perineural invasion (PnI status). The study cohort consisted of 315 consecutive patients diagnosed with prostate adenocarcinoma via transrectal ultrasound-guided needle biopsy who later underwent radical prostatectomy. We grouped and compared patients based on Grade Group accuracy, presence of IHC on biopsy, margin status, pathological stage, and PnI status. Inter-observer reproducibility was also calculated. Statistical analyzes included ANOVA, Tukey's multiple comparisons post hoc test, Chi-squared test, and Fleiss kappa statistics. Undergraded cases harboured a significantly lower number of biopsy cores (p < 0.05), than accurately graded cases. Using IHC did not affect grading accuracy significantly, nor did the number of slides from prostatectomy specimens. The mean number of slides was virtually identical when margin status, pathological stage and PnI status of prostatectomy specimens were compared. Inter-observer reproducibility at our institute was calculated as fair (overall kappa = 0.29). Grade Group accuracy is significantly improved by obtaining more cores at biopsy but is unrelated to performed IHC. The extent of sampling prostatectomy specimens, however, did not affect accuracy and failed to significantly improve detection of adverse pathological features.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Lívia Beke
- Department of Pathology, Clinical Centre, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
| | - Dániel Varga
- Department of Urology, Clinical Centre, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
| | - László Bidiga
- Department of Pathology, Clinical Centre, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
| | - Gábor Méhes
- Department of Pathology, Clinical Centre, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
| | - Sarolta Molnár
- Department of Pathology, Clinical Centre, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Iakymenko OA, Briski LM, Punnen S, Nemov I, Lugo I, Jorda M, Parekh DJ, Gonzalgo ML, Kryvenko ON. Variance of Tumor Grade at Radical Prostatectomy With Assessment of Each Tumor Nodule Versus Global Grading. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2021; 146:1032-1036. [PMID: 34752602 DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2021-0279-oa] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/15/2021] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
CONTEXT.— Multifocal prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy (RP) may be graded with assessment of each individual tumor nodule (TN) or global grading of all TNs in aggregate. OBJECTIVE.— To assess case-level grade variability between these 2 grading approaches. DESIGN.— We reviewed 776 RPs with multifocal prostate cancer with 2 or more separate TNs of different Grade Groups (GGs). Two separate grades were assigned to each RP: one based on the TN with the highest grade and a global grade based on the Gleason pattern volumes for all TNs. We then compared the results of these 2 methods. RESULTS.— The case-level grade changed by 1 or more GGs between the 2 grading methods in 35% (132 of 374) of GG3 through GG5 cases. Twelve percent (37 of 309) of GG2 cases with Gleason pattern 4 more than 5% based on individual TN grading decreased their Gleason pattern 4 to less than 5% based on the global approach. Minor tertiary pattern 5 (Gleason pattern 5 <5%) was observed in 6.8% (11 of 161) of GG4 (Gleason score 3 + 5 = 8 and 5 + 3 = 8) and GG5 cases with global grading. The risk of grade discrepancy between the 2 methods was associated with the highest-grade TN volume (inverse relationship), patient age, and number of TNs (P < .001, P = .003, and P < .001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS.— The global grading approach resulted in a lower grade in 35% of GG3 through GG5 cases compared with grading based on the highest-grade TN. Two significant risk factors for this discrepancy with a global grading approach occur when the highest-grade TN has a relatively small tumor volume and with the higher number of TNs per RP. The observed grade variability between the 2 grading schemes most likely limits the interchangeability of post-RP multi-institutional databases if those institutions use different grading approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Oleksii A Iakymenko
- From the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (Iakymenko, Briski, Nemov, Lugo, Jorda, Kryvenko), University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Laurence M Briski
- From the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (Iakymenko, Briski, Nemov, Lugo, Jorda, Kryvenko), University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Sanoj Punnen
- Department of Urology (Punnen, Jorda, Parekh, Gonzalgo, Kryvenko), University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.,The Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center (Punnen, Jorda, Parekh, Gonzalgo, Kryvenko), University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Ivan Nemov
- From the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (Iakymenko, Briski, Nemov, Lugo, Jorda, Kryvenko), University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Isabella Lugo
- From the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (Iakymenko, Briski, Nemov, Lugo, Jorda, Kryvenko), University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Merce Jorda
- From the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (Iakymenko, Briski, Nemov, Lugo, Jorda, Kryvenko), University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.,Department of Urology (Punnen, Jorda, Parekh, Gonzalgo, Kryvenko), University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.,The Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center (Punnen, Jorda, Parekh, Gonzalgo, Kryvenko), University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Dipen J Parekh
- Department of Urology (Punnen, Jorda, Parekh, Gonzalgo, Kryvenko), University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.,The Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center (Punnen, Jorda, Parekh, Gonzalgo, Kryvenko), University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Mark L Gonzalgo
- Department of Urology (Punnen, Jorda, Parekh, Gonzalgo, Kryvenko), University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.,The Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center (Punnen, Jorda, Parekh, Gonzalgo, Kryvenko), University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Oleksandr N Kryvenko
- From the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (Iakymenko, Briski, Nemov, Lugo, Jorda, Kryvenko), University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.,Department of Urology (Punnen, Jorda, Parekh, Gonzalgo, Kryvenko), University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.,The Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center (Punnen, Jorda, Parekh, Gonzalgo, Kryvenko), University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Fasciano D, Eich ML, Del Carmen Rodriguez Pena M, Rais-Bahrami S, Gordetsky J. Focused Submission of Tissue for Radical Prostatectomy Following Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion-Targeted Biopsy. Int J Surg Pathol 2019; 28:44-50. [PMID: 31342804 DOI: 10.1177/1066896919865026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Prostate cancer can be difficult to appreciate grossly and therefore partial sampling of the gland can lead to incorrect grading, staging, or margin status. However, submitting the entire prostate is more time consuming and costly. We investigated the use of magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-targeted biopsy for the selective submission of prostatectomy specimens. We performed a retrospective review for patients with cancer on targeted prostate biopsy who underwent subsequent radical prostatectomy. Prostatectomy specimens were submitted in their entirety and assessed for Grade Group, extraprostatic extension (EPE), margins, and number of blocks. For Targeted-Grossing (TG) assessment, apex margin, bladder neck margin, seminal vesicles, and vas deferens sections were included. For the remainder of the prostate, only sections from areas shown to be positive for cancer on targeted biopsy were included in the analysis. With total tissue submission, EPE was found in 39/81 (48.1%) cases and positive margins in 19/81 (23.5%) cases. The TG method required significantly fewer blocks: 15.8 ± 5.9 versus 44.9 ± 11.9 (P < .0001). The TG method would have diagnosed the correct stage in 73/81 (90.1%) cases, Grade Group in 74/81 (91.4%) cases, and margin status in 79/81 (97.5%) cases. EPE was missed completely by the TG method in 7 cases (P = .008), of which 5/7 (71.4%) had focal EPE. There was no significant difference in stage (P = .24), Grade Group (P = .95), or margin status (P = .16) between the 2 methods. Grossing utilizing selective tissue submission from areas found to be positive for prostate cancer on magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-targeted prostate biopsy remains inferior to complete submission of tissue for radical prostatectomy specimens.
Collapse
|
6
|
Collette ERP, den Bakker MA, Klaver SO, Vis AN, Kliffen M. Partial versus complete prostatectomy specimen sampling: prospective non-inferiority study for pT3a tumours and surgical margin involvement. BMJ Open 2019; 9:e024524. [PMID: 30975668 PMCID: PMC6500235 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024524] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
AIMS The importance of additional information gained by complete versus partial sampling or prostatectomy specimens is uncertain. There is sparse data on the value of complete versus partial sampling and numbers of inclusions in studies are small and retrospective. We present the results of a prospective non-inferiority study to examine if partial sampling is inferior to complete sampling in terms of pathology outcomes and clinical relevance. METHODS 564 robot-assisted prostatectomy (RARP) specimens with prospective registration and analysis were collected over a 2-year period. All patients underwent RARP between January 2014 and February 2016 in our hospital after a diagnosis of clinically localised prostate cancer. For each patient, tumour stage and surgical margin status was recorded after partial and after complete sampling. Upstaging from pT2 to pT3a and upgrading from a negative-to-positive surgical margin was analysed. RESULTS In 12 of 564 patients (2.1%), complete sampling yielded new information. In eight patients (1.4%), the surgical margin converted to positive after complete sampling. Upstaging from initial pT2 tumour in partial sampling to pT3a tumour after complete sampling was documented in five patients (0.9%). In the follow-up period (mean 35 months), a biochemical recurrence occurred in one patient. CONCLUSIONS Complete sampling provides new information in only 2.1% of cases, compared with partial sampling. We conclude that the additional information gained by complete sampling in terms of stage and surgical margin detection is statistically insignificant compared with partial sampling. Furthermore, partial sampling compared with complete sampling does not change postoperative clinical management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eelco R P Collette
- Urology, VU medisch centrum School of Medical Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - André N Vis
- Urology, VU medisch centrum School of Medical Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Mike Kliffen
- Pathology, Maasstad Ziekenhuis, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Lopez-Beltran A, Cheng L, Montorsi F, Scarpelli M, Raspollini MR, Montironi R. Concomitant bladder cancer and prostate cancer: challenges and controversies. Nat Rev Urol 2017; 14:620-629. [DOI: 10.1038/nrurol.2017.124] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
|
8
|
Edmund L, Rotker KL, Lakis NS, Brito JM, Lepe M, Lombardo KA, Renzulli JF, Matoso A. Upgrading and upstaging at radical prostatectomy in the post–prostate-specific antigen screening era: an effect of delayed diagnosis or a shift in patient selection? Hum Pathol 2017; 59:87-93. [DOI: 10.1016/j.humpath.2016.09.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2016] [Revised: 08/29/2016] [Accepted: 09/16/2016] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
|
9
|
Kryvenko ON, Epstein JI. Prostate Cancer Grading: A Decade After the 2005 Modified Gleason Grading System. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2016; 140:1140-52. [PMID: 26756649 DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2015-0487-sa] [Citation(s) in RCA: 64] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
Since 1966, when Donald Gleason, MD, first proposed grading prostate cancer based on its histologic architecture, there have been numerous changes in clinical and pathologic practices relating to prostate cancer. Patterns 1 and 2, comprising more than 30% of cases in the original publications by Gleason, are no longer reported on biopsy and are rarely diagnosed on radical prostatectomy. Many of these cases may even have been mimickers of prostate cancer that were described later with the use of contemporary immunohistochemistry. The original Gleason system predated many newly described variants of prostate cancer and our current concept of intraductal carcinoma. Gleason also did not describe how to report prostate cancer on biopsy with multiple cores of cancer or on radical prostatectomy with separate tumor nodules. To address these issues, the International Society of Urological Pathology first made revisions to the grading system in 2005, and subsequently in 2014. Additionally, a new grading system composed of Grade Groups 1 to 5 that was first developed in 2013 at the Johns Hopkins Hospital and subsequently validated in a large multi-institutional and multimodal study was presented at the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology meeting and accepted both by participating pathologists as well as urologists, oncologists, and radiation therapists. In the present study, we describe updates to the grading of prostate cancer along with the new grading system.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Oleksandr N Kryvenko
- From the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Department of Urology, and Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida (Dr Kryvenko); and the Departments of Pathology, Urology, and Oncology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland (Dr Epstein)
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Sood A, Jeong W, Dalela D, Klett DE, Abdollah F, Sammon JD, Menon M, Bhandari M. Role of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in the management of high-risk prostate cancer. Indian J Urol 2014; 30:410-7. [PMID: 25378823 PMCID: PMC4220381 DOI: 10.4103/0970-1591.142067] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
We aimed to evaluate the role of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in the management of high-risk prostate cancer (PCa), with a focus on oncological, functional and perioperative outcomes. Further, we also aimed to briefly describe our novel modification to conventional RARP that allows immediate organ retrieval and examination for intra-operative surgical margin assessment. A literature search of PubMed was performed for articles on the management of high-risk PCa. Papers written in English and concerning clinical outcomes following RARP for locally advanced and high-risk PCa were selected. Outcomes data from our own center were also included. A total of 10 contemporary series were evaluated. Biopsy Gleason score ≥ 8 was the most common cause for classification of patients into the high-risk PCa group. Biochemical failure rate, in the few series that looked at long-term follow-up, varied from 9% to 26% at 1 year. The positive surgical margin rate varied from 12% to 53.3%. Urinary continence rates varied from 78% to 92% at 1 year. The overall complication rates varied from 2.4% to 30%, with anastomotic leak and lymphocele being the most common complications. Long-term data on oncological control following RARP in high-risk patients is lacking. Short-term oncological outcomes and functional outcomes are equivalent to open radical prostatectomy (RP). Safety outcomes are better in patients undergoing RARP when compared with open RP. Improved tools for predicting the presence of organ-confined disease (OCD) are available. High-risk patients with OCD would be ideal candidates for RARP and would benefit most from surgery alone.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Akshay Sood
- Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA
| | - Wooju Jeong
- Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA
| | - Deepansh Dalela
- Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA
| | - Dane E Klett
- Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA
| | - Firas Abdollah
- Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA
| | - Jesse D Sammon
- Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA
| | - Mani Menon
- Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|