Laparoscopic Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection Combined with Real-time Interactive Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Transperineal Radioactive Seed Implantation of the Prostate

Low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer: A 15-year experience in Japan

The history of prostate brachytherapy has passed one century. In 1983, modern low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy using a transrectal ultrasound-guided procedure was introduced. In the early 1990s, low-dose-rate brachytherapy was introduced and rapidly spread across the USA due to its excellent oncological control, cost-effectiveness and technically easy procedure. Since low-dose-rate brachytherapy was introduced in Japan (2003), over 15 years have passed. More than 43 000 patients have undergone low-dose-rate brachytherapy. Japanese urologists and radiation oncologists are on course with leading brachytherapists in the USA. A nationwide prospective cohort study, J-POPS, was initiated in 2005. The J-POPS group also provides educational programs including an annual novel training course in low-dose-rate brachytherapy to familiarize urologists, radiation oncologists and pathologists with the procedure. Important information on Japanese patients has accumulated, especially by the J-POPS study group. The Japanese investigators reported excellent oncological outcomes of low-dose-rate brachytherapy, showing equivalent or superior efficacy to surgery in low- to intermediate-risk patients, and superior efficacy in high-risk patients using the surgery biochemical recurrence definition (prostate-specific antigen cut-off value of 0.2 ng/mL). Two randomized controlled studies (SHIP study: intermediate risk, and TRIP study: high risk) carried out by the J-POPS group are ongoing, and an additional follow-up study (J-POPS 2 study) has been started to evaluate survival outcomes over longer follow-up periods. Low-dose-rate brachytherapy is expected to provide a survival benefit, which must be confirmed by further studies with longer follow-up periods in the future.

Low-dose rate brachytherapy for men with localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Localized prostate cancer is a slow growing tumor for many years for the majority of affected men. Low-dose rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) is short-distance radiotherapy using low-energy radioactive sources. LDR-BT has been recommended for men with low risk localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefit and harm of LDR-BT compared to radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), and no primary therapy (NPT) in men with localized prostatic cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (from 1950), and EMBASE (from 1980) were searched in June 2010 as well as online trials registers and reference lists of reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized, controlled trials comparing LDR-BT versus RP, EBRT, and NPT in men with clinically localized prostate cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data on study methods, participants, treatment regimens, observation period and outcomes were recorded by two reviewers independently.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified only one RCT (N = 200; mean follow up 68 months). This trial compared LDR-BT and RP. The risk of bias was deemed high. Primary outcomes (overall survival, cause-specific mortality, or metastatic-free survival) were not reported. Biochemical recurrence-free survival at 5 years follow up was not significantly different between LDR-BT (78/85 (91.8%)) and RP (81/89 (91.0%)); P = 0.875; relative risk 0.92 (95% CI: 0.35 to 2.42).For severe adverse events reported at 6 months follow up, results favored LDR-BT for urinary incontinence (LDR-BT 0/85 (0.0%) versus RP 16/89 (18.0%); P < 0.001; relative risk 0) and favored RP for urinary irritation (LDR-BT 68/85 (80.0%) versus RP 4/89 (4.5%); P < 0.001; relative risk 17.80, 95% CI 6.79 to 46.66). The occurrence of urinary stricture did not significantly differ between the treatment groups (LDR-BT 2/85 (2.4%) versus RP 6/89 (6.7%); P = 0.221; relative risk 0.35, 95% CI: 0.07 to 1.68). Long-term information was not available.We did not identify significant differences of mean scores between treatment groups for patient-reported outcomes function and bother as well as generic health-related quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose rate brachytherapy did not reduce biochemical recurrence-free survival versus radical prostatectomy at 5 years. For short-term severe adverse events, low-dose rate brachytherapy was significantly more favorable for urinary incontinence, but radical prostatectomy was significantly more favorable for urinary irritation. Evidence is based on one RCT with high risk of bias.

Permanent prostate brachytherapy: a century of technical evolution

PURPOSE

To summarise the practical aspects of the development of techniques of interstitial permanent prostate brachytherapy (PPB) implantation. Prostate brachytherapy dates back to Pasteau's publication in 1913 describing the insertion of a radium capsule into the prostatic urethra to treat carcinoma of the prostate. Various implantation methods were employed but with unsatisfactory results until the development of the transrectal ultrasound in the 1980s. The subsequent two-stage Seattle technique allowed for a planned homogenous distribution of radioactive sources throughout the gland resulting in biochemical control comparable to surgical and external beam radiotherapy series. With the advent of advanced computer software and improved imaging, the technique has developed accordingly to a single stage procedure with on-table dosimetric assessment. The principles of targeting dose to the prostate while avoiding surrounding organs at risk remain as relevant today as nearly a century ago. There is an array of techniques to consider for the novice PPB provider. Whether the evolution of PPB techniques will translate into improved biochemical control is yet to be seen.

Vessel-sparing prostate radiotherapy: Dose limitation to critical erectile vascular structures (internal pudendal artery and corpus cavernosum) defined by MRI

PURPOSE

Most evidence suggests that impotence after prostate radiation therapy has a vascular etiology. The corpus cavernosum (CC) and the internal pudendal artery (IPA) are the critical vascular structures related to erectile function. This study suggests that it is feasible to markedly decrease radiation dose to the CC and the IPA and directly determine the impact of dose limitation on potency.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Twenty-five patients (10 external beam, 15 brachytherapy) underwent MRI/CT-based treatment planning for prostate cancer. In addition, 10 patients entered on the vessel-sparing protocol underwent a time-of-flight MRI angiography sequence to define the IPA. The distance from the MRI-defined prostate apex to the penile bulb (PB), CC, and IPA was measured and compared to the distance from the CT-defined apex. Doses (D5 and D50) to the PB, CC, and IPA were determined for an 80 Gy external beam course. In 5 patients, CT plans were generated and compared to MRI-based plans.

RESULTS

The combination of coronal, sagittal, and axial MRI data sets allowed superior definition of the prostate apex and its relationship to critical vascular structures. The apex to PB distance averaged 1.45 cm (0.36 standard deviation) with a range of 0.7 cm to 2.1 cm. Peak dose (D5) to the proximal CC in the MRI-planned 80 Gy course was 26 (9) Gy (0.36 of CT-planned dose), and peak dose to the IPA was 39 (13) Gy (0.61 of CT-planned dose).

CONCLUSION

The distance between the prostate apex and critical vascular structures is highly variable. Current empiric rules for CT contouring (apex 1.5 cm above PB) overestimate or underestimate the distance between the prostate apex and critical vascular structures. When defined by MRI T2 and MRI angiogram with CT registration, limitation of dose to critical erectile structures is possible, with a more significant gain than has been previously reported using dose limitation by commonly applied intensity modulated radiation therapy studies based on CT imaging. These techniques make "vessel-sparing" prostate radiotherapy feasible.

What is the optimal dose for 125I prostate implants? A dose-response analysis of biochemical control, posttreatment prostate biopsies, and long-term urinary symptoms

PURPOSE

To define the optimal dose for 125I prostate implants by correlating post implant CT dosimetry findings with urinary symptoms, biochemical failure, and posttreatment biopsies.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with T1-T2, Gleason score 2-6 prostate cancer treated with I-125 brachytherapy were analyzed. Group 1 (276 patients) was observed from 18 to 108 months (median, 34 months) and had urinary symptoms prospectively assessed using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) system. Group 2 (181 patients) observed from 24 to 108 months (median, 44 months) and did not receive hormonal therapy. Implant dose was defined as the D90 (dose delivered to 90% of the prostate on a dose-volume histogram). Patients were analyzed by dose categories: <140 Gy, 140 to <160 Gy, 160 to <180 Gy, and > or =180 Gy. In Group 1, the mean pre- to postimplant IPSS scores were compared in different dose categories by using a matched paired t test. In Group 2, the effect of dose on biochemical control was tested with actuarial methods by using the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology definition and on local control with posttreatment biopsies (113 patients).

RESULTS

A comparison of pre- with postimplant IPSS revealed no significant changes in scores in the dose groups <180 Gy except for small changes in urgency and bladder emptying in the dose group <140 Gy. In dose group >180 Gy, mean scores changed from 0.5 to 1.0 (p=0.002) for emptying, 0.76 to 1.29 (p=0.004) for weak stream, 0.24 to 0.51 (p=0.009) for straining, 1.55 to 1.82 (p=0.05) for nocturia, and 6.3 to 8.45 (p=0.0009) for the total score. Freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) at 5 years was 68% for doses <140 Gy, 97% for 140 to <160 Gy, 98% for 160 to <180 Gy, and 95% for > or =180 Gy (p=0.0025). Overall, patients with doses <140 Gy (median follow-up, 66 months) had an FFBF of 68%, compared with 96% for patients with doses > or =140 Gy (median follow-up, 35 months; p=0.0002). Multivariate analysis found dose to be the most significant factor affecting FFBF. Positive biopsies were found in 23% for doses <140 Gy, 21% for 140 to <160 Gy, 10% for 160 to <180 Gy, and 8% for > or =180 Gy. Overall, biopsies were positive in 22% for doses <160 Gy vs. 9% for > or =160 Gy (p=0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal 125I prostate implants should deliver a D90 of 140-180 Gy, on the basis of postimplant dosimetry. Doses of <140 Gy are associated with increased biochemical failure, and doses >180 Gy with a small increase in long-term urinary symptoms.

Practical considerations in permanent brachytherapy for localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate

Prostate brachytherapy has become an accepted treatment modality for localized prostate cancer. Long-term biochemical and biopsy data confirm the early positive impressions that brachytherapy is as valid a treatment option as radical prostatectomy or EBRT. Quality-of-life data also look promising, but more follow-up data are needed. Is brachytherapy as good as or perhaps better than radical prostatectomy? This question cannot be answered yet. Well-controlled, randomized studies are needed. In the meantime, the clinician will have to rely on the available published data.

Prospective assessment of patient-reported long-term urinary morbidity and associated quality of life changes after 125I prostate brachytherapy

PURPOSE

Prostate brachytherapy has been reported to have less morbidity for patients than radical prostatectomy or external beam irradiation. However, to date there have been no long-term data to support these claims. With radiation doses in excess of 140 Gy required to control the tumor, disabling chronic urinary symptoms and associated quality of life (QOL) changes might be expected to occur. This study prospectively assessed the long-term effects of (125)I prostate brachytherapy on urinary morbidity.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 248 patients with a median age of 67 years (range, 43-83 years) who presented with T1-T2 prostate cancer were treated with (125)I seed implantation and followed up for a minimum of 18 months after treatment (range, 18 to 108 months; median, 31 months). There were 177 T1b-T2a cases and 41 patients with prostate-specific antigen >10 ng/ml; 20.2% were treated with hormonal therapy. All patients prospectively reported their urinary symptoms and QOL assessment on American Urological Association symptom score records before treatment and at each follow-up visit. Urinary symptoms at last follow-up were compared with pretreatment scores. Radiation doses to the prostate (dose delivered to 90% of the gland; D(90)) and urethra (D(30)) were determined by CT-based dosimetry.

RESULTS

The median prostate D(90) was 165 Gy (range, 16.5-260 Gy), and the median urethra D(30) was 192 Gy (range, 23.5-306 Gy). Mean individual scores and QOL ranged from 0.31 to 1.65 before implantation and 0.39 to 1.73 afterward. There were no significant differences between pretreatment and last mean scores for any of the categories except for a small but significant increase in urgency (p=0.01) and weak stream (p=0.03). The cohort of patients who initially presented with marked urinary symptoms (initial score >or=3) had improvement in individual scores by 31.4% to 58.2%, total score by 31.1% (p=0.0005), and QOL by 40.6% (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that prostate brachytherapy is associated with minimal long-term urinary morbidity. The subgroup of patients who present with marked urinary symptoms before implantation has improvement in symptoms and QOL after implantation. These data substantiate the favorable long-term QOL outcomes associated with modern brachytherapy techniques.

Permanent seed implantation for localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate

Prostate brachytherapy has become a popular treatment option for localized prostate cancer with over 44,000 procedures performed in 2000. Eighty-seven percent to 93% of patients who have a serum prostate-specific antigen less than 10 ng/mL, Gleason score of 6 or less, and low risk (disease stage < or = T2a) can be expected to have an 8 to 10 year disease-free rate. The radiation dose delivered by the implants should exceed 140 Gy in men implanted with I-125 monotherapy. Patients with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer would benefit from the addition of either hormonal therapy and/or external beam irradiation to the implantation of seeds. Postimplant incontinence and proctitis can be minimized by controlling high radiation doses to the urethra and rectum. Potency is preserved in 70% of men with good preimplantation erectile function. Advances in technology, such as intraoperative dosimetry, will continue to make brachytherapy an attractive treatment option for men with localized prostate cancer.

Neoadjuvant hormonal therapy and older age are associated with adverse sexual health-related quality-of-life outcome after prostate brachytherapy

OBJECTIVES

Brachytherapy is increasingly used as a treatment for localized prostate cancer but information regarding long-term, postimplantation, patient-reported sexual health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) is scant. Neoadjuvant hormonal therapy is commonly administered with brachytherapy, yet its potentially adverse effects on subsequent sexual health have not been described using a validated HRQOL instrument. We used a validated HRQOL survey to characterize the significance of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy and other baseline factors on postimplantation sexual function and impairment.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey using the expanded prostate cancer index composite HRQOL instrument was administered to all 114 localized prostate cancer patients who underwent ultrasound-guided, transperineal brachytherapy during a 4-year period and to 142 age-matched control men. Multivariable models measured the association of baseline factors and covariates with postimplantation sexual HRQOL.

RESULTS

Older age (P = 0.01) and neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (P = 0.009) were independently associated with diminished sexual HRQOL after prostate brachytherapy. Among patients younger than 69 years old, 33% reported at least fair sexual function after brachytherapy alone compared with 19% of men after brachytherapy with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy. Of the age-matched control men younger than 69 years old, 78% reported at least fair sexual function. Among patients older than 69 years, 26% reported at least fair sexual function after brachytherapy alone compared with 5% after brachytherapy with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy, and 61% of age-matched controls reported at least fair sexual function.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient age and neoadjuvant hormonal therapy are independent, significant determinants of sexual HRQOL after prostate brachytherapy. These factors should be taken into consideration when counseling patients with localized prostate cancer regarding the expected, postimplantation sexual HRQOL outcome.

Sexual (dys)function after radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a review

PURPOSE

Prostate cancer has become the most common nonskin malignant neoplasm in older men in Western countries. As treatment efficacy has improved, issues related to posttherapy quality of life and sexual functioning have become more important.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We discuss the various methods used to evaluate erectile and sexual dysfunction and the definition of potency. The etiologies of erectile dysfunction after external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy for prostate cancer are also reviewed. The literature is summarized, and comparative studies of radiation and surgery are surveyed briefly.

RESULTS

Rates of erectile dysfunction vary from 6 to 84% after external beam radiotherapy and from 0 to 51% after brachytherapy. In most of the studies, the analysis is retrospective, the definition of erectile dysfunction is not clear, only one question about sexual functioning is asked, and nonvalidated instruments are used. The etiology of erectile dysfunction after radiation for prostate cancer is not completely understood.

CONCLUSIONS

Because erectile function is only one component of sexual function, it is necessary to assess sexual desire, satisfaction, frequency of intercourse, and other such factors when evaluating the effects of therapy. Patients should be offered sexual counseling and informed about the availability of effective treatments for erectile dysfunction, such as sildenafil, intracavernosal injection, and vacuum devices.

Role of hormonal therapy in the management of intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer treated with permanent radioactive seed implantation

PURPOSE

To study the impact of hormonal therapy (HTx) on intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer treated with permanent radioactive seed implantation.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with Stage T1b-T3bN0 prostate cancer, and Gleason score > or = 7 or prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level >10 ng/mL were treated with seed implantation with or without HTx. Their disease was defined as intermediate risk (PSA 10-20, Gleason score 7, or Stage T2b) or high risk (two or more intermediate criteria, or PSA >20 ng/mL, Gleason score 8-10, or Stage T2c-T3). The median follow-up for 201 eligible patients was 42 months (range 18-110). Biochemical failure was defined as a rising PSA >1.0 ng/mL. Pretreatment disease characteristics, implant dose, and HTx were evaluated using univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

HTx significantly improved 5-year actuarial freedom from biochemical failure rate, 79% vs. 54% without HTx. In addition, high-dose, PSA < or = 15 ng/mL, intermediate risk, and Stage T2a or lower significantly improved outcome in the univariate analyses. HTx was the most significant predictor of 5-year actuarial freedom from biochemical failure (p <0.0001) in a multivariate analysis. The best outcome was in the intermediate-risk patients treated with a high implant dose and HTx, resulting in a 4-year actuarial freedom from biochemical failure rate of 94%.

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective review, HTx improved outcome in intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with brachytherapy. HTx was the most important prognostic factor in the univariate and multivariate analyses.

Prostate gland motion and deformation caused by needle placement during brachytherapy

PURPOSE

To determine the extent of edge and gland position changes caused by needle insertion in patients undergoing prostate brachytherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Nineteen patients with T1-T3 prostate cancer were implanted with the real-time method by using a two-phase peripheral loading technique. Serial contours of the prostate at 5-mm intervals were acquired by the dose-planning system. All of the peripheral needles were then placed and spaced 5-10 mm apart by using the largest transverse ultrasound image as the reference plane. The position of the probe was relocated at the zero plane, and the difference between the preneedle and postneedle zero plane was recorded as the difference in the z axis. Axial ultrasound images were again acquired. The second set of captured images, which matched in number the first set, was contoured over the previously contoured preneedle images. Prostate gland deformation and displacement were determined by comparing the preneedle contoured image with the images captured after needle placement. Deformation was determined by calculating the differences between the edges of the gland as measured at the major axis of the gland (x and y planes). Displacement was determined by measuring the differences between the center positions of the two contoured structures. Deformation and displacement were determined on each acquired 5-mm image. Differences were compared by student's t test.

RESULTS

The mean preneedle prostate volume was 47 ml (range, 21.5-68.7 ml), compared with 48.1 ml (range, 19.4-80.3 ml; p = 0.228) after peripheral needle placement. A median of 16 (range, 12-19) peripheral needles were placed. The median change in the base position of the prostate was 1.5 cm (range of 0 to 3.0 cm; p = 0.0034). The mean x and y deformation was 6.8 mm (median, 7.9 mm; range, 4.3-8.1 mm) and 3.6 mm (median, 3.3 mm; range, 1.0-5.5 mm), respectively. The greatest deformation for any individual slice for x was 21.6 mm and for y was 15.3 mm. The mean number of slices that were found with a >2-, 5-, and 10-mm deformation in the x axis was 7 (range, 3-10), 4 (range, 1-3), and 1 (range, 0-4), respectively. Similar deformation in the y axis was found in 6 (range, 3-10), 2.5 (range, 0-6), and 0.3 (range, 0-2) slices. The mean x and y displacement was 1.9 mm (median, 1.8 mm; range, 0.3-6.6 mm) and 2.8 mm (median, 1.9 mm; range, 2-5.8 mm). The greatest displacement for any individual slice for x was 7 mm and for y was 10 mm. The mean number of slices with a displacement >2, 5, and 10 mm in the x axis was 5 (range, 1-10), 0.8 (range, 0-5), and 0, respectively. Similar displacement in the y axis was found in 5 (range, 0-9), 1.7 (range, 0-7), and 0 slices, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Placing most needles in the periphery results in a minimal prostate volume increase, suggesting little need to overplan the implant when this method is used. However, significant edge and gland position changes caused by the needle insertion did occur. These changes may explain some of the difficulty in reproducing the preplan and should be taken into consideration for all types of prostate brachytherapy planning.

Intraoperative planning and evaluation of permanent prostate brachytherapy: report of the American Brachytherapy Society

PURPOSE

The preplanned technique used for permanent prostate brachytherapy has limitations that may be overcome by intraoperative planning. The goal of the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) project was to assess the current intraoperative planning process and explore the potential for improvement in intraoperative treatment planning (ITP).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Members of the ABS with expertise in ITP performed a literature review, reviewed their clinical experience with ITP, and explored the potential for improving the technique.

RESULTS

The ABS proposes the following terminology in regard to prostate planning process: *Preplanning--Creation of a plan a few days or weeks before the implant procedure. *Intraoperative planning--Treatment planning in the operating room (OR): the patient and transrectal ultrasound probe are not moved between the volume study and the seed insertion procedure. * Intraoperative preplanning--Creation of a plan in the OR just before the implant procedure, with immediate execution of the plan. *Interactive planning--Stepwise refinement of the treatment plan using computerized dose calculations derived from image-based needle position feedback. *Dynamic dose calculation--Constant updating of dose distribution calculations using continuous deposited seed position feedback. Both intraoperative preplanning and interactive planning are currently feasible and commercially available and may help to overcome many of the limitations of the preplanning technique. Dosimetric feedback based on imaged needle positions can be used to modify the ITP. However, the dynamic changes in prostate size and shape and in seed position that occur during the implant are not yet quantifiable with current technology, and ITP does not obviate the need for postimplant dosimetric analysis. The major current limitation of ITP is the inability to localize the seeds in relation to the prostate. Dynamic dose calculation can become a reality once these issues are solved. Future advances can be expected in methods of enhancing seed identification, in imaging techniques, and in the development of better source delivery systems. Additionally, ITP should be correlated with outcome studies, using dosimetric, toxicity, and efficacy endpoints.

CONCLUSION

ITP addresses many of the limitations of current permanent prostate brachytherapy and has some advantages over the preplanned technique. Further technologic advancement will be needed to achieve dynamic real-time calculation of dose distribution from implanted sources, with constant updating to allow modification of subsequent seed placement and consistent, ideal dose distribution within the target volume.

Penile erectile function after permanent radioactive seed implantation for treatment of prostate cancer

PURPOSE

We assess erectile function after prostate brachytherapy and analyze those factors affecting potency preservation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 416 patients treated from October 1990 to September 1998 with permanent radioactive seed implantation for T1 to T2 prostate cancer had erectile function assessed before and after treatment. Erectile function was assessed using the scoring system of 0-complete inability to have erections, 1-able to have erections but insufficient for intercourse, 2-can have erections sufficient for intercourse but considered suboptimal and 3-has normal erectile function. Implant dose was defined as the D90, which was the dose delivered to 90% of the gland on a dose volume histogram from the 1-month computerized tomography based dosimetric analysis.

RESULTS

Pretreatment erectile function assessment revealed scores of 0 in 57 (14%), 1 in 46 (11%), 2 in 77 (18%) and 3 in 236 (57%) patients. In 313 patients who were potent with a score 2 or greater before therapy the actuarial freedom from any decrease in erectile function score was 64% and 30% at 3 and 6 years, respectively. The actuarial preservation of potency, with a score 2 or greater, was 79% and 59% at 3 and 6 years, respectively. The 2 factors found to have a significant negative effect on potency in univariate and multivariate analyses were high implant dose (D90 greater than 160 Gy. for I-125 and D90 greater than 100 Gy. for Pd-103) and a pretreatment erectile function score of 2 versus 3.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of potency preservation after brachytherapy is high, although a decrease occurs from 3 to 6 years. Pretreatment erectile dysfunction as well as higher implant dose are associated with greater impotency.

Postimplant dosimetry for (125)I prostate implants: definitions and factors affecting outcome

OBJECTIVE

An analysis of CT-based dosimetry was performed to assess the efficacy of the real time method of prostate implantation, explore the relationship of various dose descriptions and determine implant factors affecting outcome.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between 7/95 and 8/99, 297 patients underwent (125)I implants for T1-T2 prostate cancer and had CT-based dosimetry performed (TG43 formalism). Dosimetry was performed 1 month postimplant. Using a dose-volume histogram, doses delivered to 100%, 95%, 90%, and 80% of the prostate (D100, D95, D90, D80, respectively) as well as percentages of the gland receiving 240 Gy, 160 Gy, 140 Gy (V240, V160, V140, respectively) were reported. Correlations between the various dose parameters and D90 were generated. The effect of the number of seeds implanted, seeds/volume, prostate volume, experience as assessed by time (8/01/99-date of implant), ultrasound probe (mechanical sector vs. dual phased electronic), and the ratio of the CT dosimetry prostate volume/ultrasound implant volume (CT/US vol) were analyzed.

RESULTS

The median D100, D95, D90, and D80 values were 10,200 cGy, 15,655 cGy, 17,578 cGy, and 19,873 cGy, respectively. The median V240, V160, and V140 were 56%, 94%, and 98%, respectively. Correlations of dose descriptions found a close relationship of D95, D80, V240, V160, and V140 with D90 with r values of 0.928, 0.973, 0.911, 0.816, and 0.733, respectively. D100 correlated poorly with D90 (r = 0.099). Using a stepwise regression analysis, CT/US vol ratio, prostate volume, and seed number were the only significant factors affecting D90 with CT/US vol ratio having the greatest effect. The dual-phased electronic probe was associated with fewer D90 values of less than 140 Gy (2%) compared to the mechanical sector probe (14%) (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

CT-based dosimetry results reveal the real-time implant technique to be an effective method of prostate implantation. Factors associated with more precise implantation, such as decreased postimplant edema, new technology, and increased number of seeds will lead to higher D90 values.

Intraoperative preplanning for transperineal ultrasound-guided permanent prostate brachytherapy

PURPOSE

To describe our approach to intraoperative preplanning (INTRA-OP) for prostate implants and compare it to our standard method using a pre-implant volume study (STAND).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Twenty patients (10 STAND, 10 INTRA-OP) were evaluated. Time required for each step of the INTRA-OP procedure was recorded. Overall procedure times and operating room times were obtained for all sessions. Postimplant dosimetry was CT-based.

RESULTS

Mean times required for each stage of the INTRA-OP procedure were as follows: Pre-implant TRUS/prostate stabilization, 26 min; image transfer, 4 min; volume outlining, 8 min; plan generation, 18 min; initial needle loading, 17 min; seed implantation, 57 min. Mean time for the implantation session was 150 min for the INTRA-OP and 120 min for the STAND groups (p = 0.002). However, this difference is negated if the preplanning volume study is included. In addition, there was a trend toward a shorter time for the INTRA-OP patients when evaluating mean total operating room times (200 min vs. 220 min; p = 0.07). The mean postimplant %D80 for the INTRA-OP patients was 104. 8% vs. 116.2% for the STAND group (p = 0.1). The corresponding %D90 values were 85.3% and 94.6%, respectively (p = 0.08).

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative preplanning increased the time required for the implantation session, but appeared to decrease overall operating room time. The overall convenience of the procedure makes intraoperative preplanning an attractive technique for transperineal ultrasound-guided prostate brachytherapy.

Biopsy results after real-time ultrasound-guided transperineal implants for stage T1-T2 prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To analyze the results of ultrasound-guided brachytherapy for stage T1-T2 prostate cancer, as shown by biopsy results.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The 268 patients (mean age 66 years; range 41-83 years) underwent real-time ultrasound-guided implantation of either iodine-125 (N = 186) or palladium-103 (N = 82) seeds. Of these patients, 96 (36%) received total androgen suppression for 3 months prior to and 3 months after implantation. Prostate biopsy was performed 24 months later, with the six to eight cores all being interpreted by the same pathologist. Each specimen was rated either positive or negative for cancer.

RESULTS

Of the 268 patients, 238 (89%) had a negative biopsy at 24 months. Among the patients receiving androgen suppression, 2% were found to have positive biopsies compared with 16% of those not given hormones (P = 0.004). Of the 155 patients with stage T1-T(2a) cancer, 6% had a positive biopsy compared with 19% of patients with stage T(2b) or T(2c) cancer (P = 0.001). In the entire series, the pretreatment serum concentration of prostate specific antigen, Gleason score, and isotope (I v Pd) were not significant predictors of a positive biopsy. However, among the 172 patients who did not receive androgen suppression, all three factors were predictive: 42% for Gleason score of 7 to 10 v 13% for Gleason score < or =6 (P = 0.001): 25% for pretreatment PSA concentration >10 ng/mL v 13% for PSA < or = 10 ng/mL (P = 0.05); and 27% for stage T(2b) or T(2c) v 9% for stage T1 or T(2a) (P = 0.001). The isotope used and the last PSA value were not significant predictors.

CONCLUSION

Brachytherapy provides excellent local control of prostate cancer, with 89% of patients having negative biopsies 2 years after treatment. High-risk patients may benefit from the addition of androgen suppression.

Prostate brachytherapy in patients with prostate volumes >/= 50 cm(3): dosimetic analysis of implant quality

OBJECTIVES

Permanent implantation with (125)I in patients with localized prostate cancer who have prostate volumes >/= 50 cm(3) is often technically difficult owing to pubic arch interference. The objective of this study was to describe dosimetry outcomes in a group of patients who were implanted using the real-time ultrasound-guided technique who had prostate volumes >/= 50 cm(3).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 331 patients received an (125)I prostate seed implant from January 1, 1995, to June 1, 1999, of whom 66 (20%) had prostate volumes >/= 50 cm(3) at the time of the procedure. The real-time seed implant method was used in all patients and consisted of intraoperative planning and real-time seed placement using a combination of axial and sagittal ultrasound imaging. Pubic arch interference was managed using an extended lithotomy position or by angling the tip of the ultrasound probe in an anterior direction. No preimplant pubic arch CT scan study was performed and no patients were excluded from treatment because of prostate size. Implant quality was assessed using CT-based dosimetry performed 1 month postimplant. Dose-volume histograms for the prostate, bladder, rectum, and urethra volumes were generated. The target dose for these implants was 160 Gy and an adequate implant was defined as the dose delivered to 90% of the prostate (D90) >/= 140 Gy. The dose delivered to 95% of the prostate (D95) and doses to 30% of the rectal (DRECT30) and urethral (DURE30) volumes were also calculated.

RESULTS

Prostate volumes in the 66 patients ranged from 50 to 93 cm(3) (median 57, mean 61 cm(3)). Total activity implanted was 27.8-89.1 mCi (median 57 mCi), with a range in activity per seed of 0.36-0.56 mCi (median 0.4 mCi). The prostate D90s and D95s ranged from 13,245 to 22,637 cGy (median 18,750) and 11,856 to 20,853 cGy (median 16,725), respectively. Only one patient (1.5%) had a D90 < 140 Gy. The DURE30 values ranged from 15,014 to 27,800 cGy (median 20,410) and the DRECT30 values were 3137-9910 cGy (median 5515).

CONCLUSION

Implantation of the large prostate can be accomplished using the real-time method. A total of 98.5% of the patients receive a high-quality implant. In addition, these implants should not put patients at increased risk for significant urinary and bowel complications because urethral and rectal doses can be kept at acceptable levels.

Does prostate brachytherapy treat the seminal vesicles? A dose-volume histogram analysis of seminal vesicles in patients undergoing combined PD-103 prostate implantation and external beam irradiation

PURPOSE

Combined brachytherapy of the prostate and external beam irradiation (EBRT) of the prostate and seminal vesicles (SV) is becoming a popular treatment for high-risk prostate cancer. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) analysis of the SV in patients undergoing this treatment was performed to determine the dose distribution to the SV and the adequacy of this treatment in patients with potential SV involvement.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Twenty-five consecutive patients were treated with a Pd-103 implant of the prostate alone and 45 Gy of EBRT to the prostate and SV. Attempts were not made to implant the SV but seeds were routinely placed at the junction of the prostate and SV. All patients underwent CT-based postimplant dosimetric analysis 1 month after implantation. As part of this analysis, DVH were generated for the prostate and total SV volume (SVT). In addition, the SV was divided into 6-mm-thick volumes identified as SV1, SV2, SV3, SV4, and SV5 starting from the junction of the prostate and SV and extending distally. DVH were also generated for these structures. Delivered dose was defined as the D90 (dose delivered to 90% of the organ on DVH).

RESULTS

The median volumes in cc of the prostate, SVT, SV1, SV2, SV3, SV4, and SV5 were 34.33, 9.75, 2.7, 3.48, 2.92, 3.18, and 1.96 respectively. The SVT contained from 0-9 seeds (median 2). There was little dose delivered to the SVT and SV volumes from the implanted prostate. The median D90 values for the prostate, SVT, SV1, SV2, SV3, SV4, and SV5 were 8615 cGy, 675 cGy, 3100 cGy, 1329 cGy, 553 cGy, 246 cGy, and 67 cGy, respectively. The dose delivered to the prostate covered small percentages of SV. The percents of SV volumes covered by the prostate D90 were 11, 35, 3.3, 0, 0, and 0 for SVT, SV1, SV2, SV3, SV4, and SV5, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

DVH analysis of the SV reveals that dose generated from an implanted prostate contributes little to the SV. Those patients at high risk for SV involvement may be undertreated with combined EBRT to prophylactic doses and prostate implantation.

Permanent radioactive seed implantation in the treatment of prostate cancer

Prostate brachytherapy has come a long way in the last 15 years, from an open free-hand technique with which seed placement was often inaccurate to the highly technical and accurate procedure of today. It has become a viable treatment option for low-risk patients along with EBRT and prostatectomy. Its most promising use may be in combination with hormonal therapy and EBRT in moderate- to high-risk patients, for whom it may offer improved outcomes over standard single-modality therapies.

A comprehensive review of prostate cancer brachytherapy: defining an optimal technique

PURPOSE

A comprehensive review of prostate cancer brachytherapy literature was performed to determine if an optimal method of implantation could be identified, and to compare and contrast techniques currently in use.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A MEDLINE search was conducted to obtain all articles in the English language on prostate cancer brachytherapy from 1985 through 1998. Articles were reviewed and grouped to determine the primary technique of implantation, the method or philosophy of source placement and/or dose specification, the technique to evaluate implant quality, overall treatment results (based upon pretreatment prostate specific antigen, (PSA), and biochemical control) and clinical, pathological or biochemical outcome based upon implant quality.

RESULTS

A total of 178 articles were identified in the MEDLINE database. Of these, 53 studies discussed evaluable techniques of implantation and were used for this analysis. Of these studies, 52% used preoperative ultrasound to determine the target volume to be implanted, 16% used preoperative computerized tomography (CT) scans, and 18% placed seeds with an open surgical technique. An additional 11% of studies placed seeds or needles under ultrasound guidance using interactive real-time dosimetry. The number and distribution of radioactive sources to be implanted or the method used to prescribe dose was determined using nomograms in 27% of studies, a least squares optimization technique in 11%, or not stated in 35%. In the remaining 26%, sources were described as either uniformly, differentially, or peripherally placed in the gland. To evaluate implant quality, 28% of studies calculated some type of dose-volume histogram, 21% calculated the matched peripheral dose, 19% the minimum peripheral dose, 14% used some type of CT-based qualitative review and, in 18% of studies, no implant quality evaluation was mentioned. Six studies correlated outcome with implant dose. One study showed an association of implant dose with the achievement of a PSA nadir < or = 0.5. Two studies showed an improvement in biochemical control with a D90 (dose to 90% of the prostate volume) of 120 to 140 Gy or higher, and 2 additional studies found an association of clinical outcome with implant dose. One study correlated implant quality with biopsy results. Of the articles, 33 discussed evaluable treatment results, but only 16 reported findings based upon pretreatment PSA and biochemical control. Three- to 5-year biochemical control rates ranged from 48% to 100% for pretreatment PSAs < or = 4, 55% to 90% for PSAs between 4 and 10, 30% to 89% for PSAs > 10, < or = 20 and < 10% to 100% for PSAs > 20. Due to substantial differences in patient selection criteria (e.g., median Gleason score, clinical stage, pretreatment PSA), number of patients treated, median follow-up, definitions of biochemical control, and time points for analysis, no single technique consistently produced superior results.

CONCLUSIONS

Our comprehensive review of prostate cancer brachytherapy literature failed to identify an optimal treatment approach when studies were analyzed for treatment outcome based upon pretreatment PSA and biochemical control. Although several well-designed studies showed an improvement in outcome with total dose or implant quality, the numerous techniques for implantation and the varied and inconsistent methods to specify dose or evaluate implant quality suggest that standardized protocols should be developed to objectively evaluate this treatment approach. These protocols have recently been suggested and, when implemented, should significantly improve the reporting of treatment data and, ultimately, the efficacy of prostate brachytherapy.

Use of three-dimensional radiation therapy planning tools and intraoperative ultrasound to evaluate high dose rate prostate brachytherapy implants

PURPOSE

We performed a pilot study to evaluate the quality of high dose rate (HDR) prostate implants using a new technique combining intraoperative real-time ultrasound images with a commercially available 3-dimensional radiation therapy planning (3D RTP) system.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Twenty HDR prostate implants performed by four different physicians on a phase I/II protocol were evaluated retrospectively. Radiation therapy (RT) consisted of pelvic external beam RT (EBRT) to a dose of 46 Gy in 2-Gy fractions over 5 weeks and 2 HDR implants (prescribed dose of 950 cGy per implant). Our in-house real-time geometric optimization technique was used in all patients. Each HDR treatment was delivered without moving the patient. Ultrasound image sets were acquired immediately after needle placement and just prior to HDR treatment. The ultrasound image sets, needle and source positions and dwell times were imported into a commercial computerized tomography (CT) based 3D RTP system. Prostate contours were outlined manually caudad to cephalad. Dose-volume histograms (DVHs) of the prostate were evaluated for each implant.

RESULTS

Four patients with stage T2a carcinoma, 4 with stage T2b, and 3 with stage T1c were studied. The median number of needles used per implant was 16 (range 14-18). The median treated volume of the implant (volume of tissue covered by the 100% isodose surface) was 82.6 cc (range 52.6-96.3 cc). The median target volume based on the contours entered in the 3D RTP system was 44.83 cc (range 28.5-67.45 cc). The calculated minimum dose to the target volume was 70% of the prescribed dose (range 45-97%). On average 92% of the target volume received the prescribed dose (range 75-99 %). The mean homogeneity index (fraction of the target volume receiving between 1.0 to 1.5 times the prescribed dose) was 80% or 0.8 (range 0.55-0.9). These results compare favorably to recent studies of permanent implants which report a minimum target volume dose of 43% (range 29-50%) and an average of 85% of the target volume (range 76-92%) receiving the prescribed dose.

CONCLUSIONS

The feasibility of evaluating HDR prostate implants using ultrasound images (acquired immediately prior to treatment) with a commercially available 3D RTP system was established. The dosimetric characteristics of these HDR implants appear to be substantially different compared to permanent implants. These developments allow quantitative evaluation of the dosimetric quality of HDR prostate treatments. Future studies will examine any correlation between the dosimetric quality of the implant and clinical/biochemical outcomes.

Outpatient ultrasound-guided palladium 103 brachytherapy for localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate: a preliminary report of 434 patients

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of palladium 103 (Pd-103) brachytherapy in Stage T1 and T2 adenocarcinoma of the prostate.

METHODS

Charts of 474 patients treated between 1991 and 1996 with transperineal real-time ultrasound-guided Pd-103 implants were reviewed to assess post-treatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and follow-up biopsy results. Of 474 patients, 434 had sufficient data for this report. The implant technique used allows precise placement of seeds and accurate dose delivery of the entire prostate. Preoperative neoadjuvant leuprolide (Lupron) and flutamide (Eulexin) were given selectively to reduce prostate size greater than 50 cc and for Gleason grade lesions greater than 7.

RESULTS

Of 434 patients, successful cancer control was demonstrated in 81% of patients by a decrease in PSA levels to less than 1.5 ng/mL at 1 year. Biopsies were negative in 88% of patients 1 year after the procedure and in 89% at 2 years. Analysis of the data suggests that patients with pretreatment PSA levels less than 10 ng/mL had the best outcomes. There were no disease-related deaths; the predominant morbidity was short-term bladder and bowel irritation without permanent sequelae. Incontinence occurred in less than 5% of patients who had undergone prior transurethral resection of the prostate. Impotence occurred in less than 15% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The technique used in this study proved effective in reducing PSA levels to less than 1.5 ng/mL and in producing negative biopsies 1 and 2 years postoperatively. Results are comparable to external-beam radiation therapy, demonstrating a significant reduction in morbidity.

Radiotherapy options for localized prostate cancer based upon pretreatment serum prostate-specific antigen levels and biochemical control: a comprehensive review of the literature

PURPOSE

To review all the available radiotherapy (RT) literature on localized prostate cancer treatment where serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels were used to both stratify patients and evaluate outcome and determine if any conclusions can be reached regarding an optimal radiotherapeutic management for this disease.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A MEDLINE search was conducted to obtain all articles in English on prostate cancer treatment employing RT from 1986-1997. Studies were considered eligible for review only if they met all the following criteria: 1) pretreatment PSA values were recorded and grouped for subsequent evaluation, 2) posttreatment PSA values were continuously monitored, 3) definitions of biochemical control were stated, and 4) the median follow-up was given.

RESULTS

Of the 246 articles identified, only 20 met the inclusion criteria; 4 using conformal external beam RT, 8 using conventional external beam RT, and 8 using interstitial brachytherapy (4 using a permanent implant alone, 3 combining external beam RT with a permanent implant, and 1 combining a conformal temporary interstitial implant boost with external beam RT). No studies using neutrons (with or without external beam RT) or androgen deprivation (combined with external beam RT) were identified where patients were stratified by pretreatment PSA levels. Results for all therapies were extremely variable with the 3-5-year rates of biochemical control for patients with pretreatment PSA levels < or = 4 ng/ml ranging from 48 to 100%, for PSA levels >4 and < or = 10 ng/ml ranging from 44 to 90%, for PSA levels >10 and < or = 20 ng/ml ranging from 27 to 89%, and for PSA levels >20 ranging from 14 to 89%. The median Gleason score, T-stage, definition of biochemical control, and follow-up were substantially different from series to series. No RT option consistently produced superior results.

CONCLUSIONS

When data are reviewed from studies using serum PSA levels to stratify patients and to evaluate treatment outcome, no consistently superior RT technique was identified. These data suggest that standard definitions of disease stage (combining clinical, pathologic, and biochemical criteria) and a common definition of biochemical cure (as developed by the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology Consensus Panel) need to be adopted to evaluate treatment efficacy and advise patients on the most appropriate radiotherapeutic option for their disease.

Current issues in techniques of prostate brachytherapy

Adenocarcinoma of the prostate is the most common malignancy diagnosed among men in the United States today. Brachytherapy permits conformal radiotherapy and dose escalation, and it offers the convenience of a single-day outpatient procedure which is very attractive to patients with a busy life-style. The reported potency preservation rates with brachytherapy are superior to both external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and surgery. The older retropubic techniques have been replaced by ultrasound or CT-guided transperineal techniques. Prostate brachytherapy may be temporary or permanent, and the planning techniques for either approach are similar. This review briefly discusses the advantages and limitations of each. Temporary techniques may be used with low dose rate or high dose rate applications. The basic steps include assessing prostate volume by any diagnostic modality (CT or ultrasonography), determining total activity needed to encompass the gland and deliver the appropriate minimum peripheral dose, and determining the pattern of placement of the seeds within the gland. Preplanning may be done either by ultrasound or by CT. The operative technique requires the visualization of the prostate in three dimensions and is performed using combination of ultrasound and fluoroscopy or fluoroscopy in two axes. The New York Hospital technique employs CT-based preplanning along with ultrasound and fluoroscopy during the operative procedure. Special circumstances that necessitate neoadjuvant hormonal therapy include interference from the pubic arch and large volume glands. An analysis of patients with stage T2a disease treated at the New York Hospital-Queens, from 1990-1995, reveals an actuarial clinical freedom from relapse of 79% at 5 years and a 5-year biochemical freedom from relapse of 64% which is comparable to that reported for similar risk groups of disease by other centers. Potency is preserved in greater than 80% of patients in our series. Patient selection criteria include the pre-treatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, tumor grade (Gleason), stage of disease, and presence or absence of bilateral positive biopsies and/or perineural invasion. Based on our review of the literature and our clinical results, we have divided patients with prostate cancer into good, intermediate and poor risk groups. We recommend brachytherapy as the sole procedure for good risk patients, and a combination of external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy for the intermediate risk group. Future avenues for research include a search for improved imaging techniques and possibly newer isotopes.

Erectile dysfunction following minimally invasive treatments for prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

Cryosurgical ablation of the prostate (CSAP) and interstitial radiotherapy (IR) are relatively new procedures intended to be less invasive than radical prostatectomy for the treatment of prostate cancer. Despite absence of long-term or intermediate data of efficacy, many patients choose one of these therapies because they presume their potency will be maintained. We report our experience with CSAP, IR, and post-procedure erectile dysfunction.

METHODS

Global sexual assessments were made in 12 months after therapy in 28 CSAP patients, and at 18 months in 37 IR patients. Each patient was contacted by telephone following his procedure. The patients were asked several questions regarding their sexual function both preoperatively and postoperatively. The questionnaire was administered only to the patient.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight of 36 patients who underwent CSAP responded to the questionnaire (78%). Twenty patients were potent preoperatively (71%). The mean age of the potent group was 69 years (range 54 to 82). Following therapy, 2 of these patients (10%) reported potency at 12 months. Thirty-seven of 42 patients who underwent IR responded to the questionnaire (88%). Twenty-seven were potent preoperatively (73%). The mean age of the potent group was 70 years (range 56 to 83). The mean follow-up was 18 months (range 5 to 36). Following therapy, 15 patients reported potency (55%). All of the patients who reported potency felt that the quality of their erections had decreased following radiation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our short-term results with IR and CSAP suggest a significant adverse effect on erectile function. Our results suggest that enhanced preservation of potency should not be used as an enticement in the promotion of IR or CSAP.

Prostate specific antigen findings and biopsy results following interactive ultrasound guided transperineal brachytherapy for early stage prostate carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Interactive, transrectal, ultrasound-guided transperineal implantation is a new technique for performing permanent brachytherapy implants of the prostate. Prostate specific antigen (PSA) findings, biopsy results, and morbidity are examined to demonstrate its efficacy and safety in treating early stage prostate carcinoma.

METHODS

Ninety-seven patients underwent permanent implants for classifications T1 to T2 adenocarcinoma of the prostate gland with a median follow-up of 18 months (range: 6-51 months). Seventy-nine patients had negative laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissections prior to implantation. Patients with positive lymph nodes were not implanted. The radioactive isotope used was I-125 in 71 patients and Pd-103 in 26 patients.

RESULTS

PSA failure was defined as two consecutive increases in PSA above the nadir level. The actuarial freedom from PSA failure (FFPF) at 2 years was 76% for the entire group. Stage significantly affected FFPF. Patients classified as T1b to T2a (35) had a FFPF of 91% at 2 years compared with 68.5% for patients classified as T2b to T2c (62) (P = 0.04). The pre-treatment PSA also significantly affected FFPF. Patients with PSA values of < or = 10 ng/mL (44) had a FFPF of 83% at 2 years. A similar rate of 82% was found in patients with PSA values of 10.1 to 20 ng/mL (29). Patients with PSA values > 20 ng/mL (24) had a significantly poorer FFPF at 2 years of 58% (P = 0.02). The PSA values of patients free from a PSA failure (82) ranged from 0.1 to 12.9 ng/mL with a median of 0.8 ng/mL. Transrectal prostate biopsies were performed 18 to 36 months posttreatment in 39 patients. Negative biopsies were found in 74% (29/39) of cases. The procedure was associated with an actuarial preservation of erectile function rate and sexual potency at 2 years of 96% and 79%, respectively. There were no cases of urinary incontinence or radiation cystitis. Associated morbidity included urinary retention requiring catheterization in 4% of the patients, outlet obstruction requiring a transurethral resection of the prostate in 2% and Grade 2 rectal complications in 1%.

CONCLUSIONS

Interactive, ultrasound-guided transperineal brachytherapy results in a low PSA failure rate, high negative biopsy rate, and is associated with low morbidity and preservation of erectile function.

A new minimally invasive open pelvic lymphadenectomy surgical technique for the staging of prostate cancer

We report a new method for lymphadenectomy, the minilaparotomy (inguinal) pelvic lymph node dissection (MLPLND), and compare it with laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) in terms of cost, effectiveness, operation time and morbidity. We reviewed a series of 111 consecutive patients: 51 had MLPLND and 60 had LPLND. All patients had proved adenocarcinoma of the prostate by biopsy. Of the MLPLND patients, only 1 had to stay overnight in the hospital, and all left within 24 hours. Pelvic lymphadenectomy consisted of nodal removal along the internal iliac vessels and the external iliac vein, and nodes of the obturator foramen. A total of 14% of the patients had disease involving the lymph nodes. The cost of MLPLND was 50% of the cost of LPLND, with no interoperative or postoperative morbidity. This new operation can be performed thoroughly an inexpensively in approximately 35 minutes, with little or no morbidity. Since the drawbacks of laparoscopic techniques associated with instrument costs and the learning curve for this technically difficult operation are eliminated, staging pelvic lymphadenectomy can be performed routinely on a wider variety of patients with potential metastatic disease. Currently, we recommend MLPLND to any patient with a tumor of Gleason score 7 or higher or a serum prostate-specific antigen value of 15 ng/mL or higher.