[Old and new interventional therapies in the treatment of symptomatic benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH)]

Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia is a common entity among the aging male population. Its prevalence is increasing with age and is around 80% in the over 80-years old. The androgen-estrogen ratio changes in favor of the estrogens, which leads to a growth of prostatic tissue, presenting histologically as hyperplasia. BPH can cause irritative or obstructive symptoms or both. Nowadays we speak of bladder storage or bladder voiding symptoms, summarised as LUTS (Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms). LUTS has a structural and a functional component, the structural being caused by the size of the adenoma itself the functional depending on the muscle tone of the bladder neck and the prostatic urethra. To investigate LUTS, we use validated symptom scores, sonography for residual urine and eventually a urodynamic evaluation. There are 3 grades of BPH. The indication for an interventional therapy is relative in BPH II, and absolute in BPH III. Prior to treatment, other diseases mimicking the same symptoms, have to be ruled out and adequatly treated. Electro-resection of the prostate (TUR-P) remains the standard therapy and the benchmark any new technology has to compete with. TUR-P has good short- and longterm results, but can be associated with a considerable perioperative morbidity, and the learning curve for the operator is long. The most promising of the newer techniques is the Holmium-Laser-Enucleation of the prostate (Laser-TUR-P), showing at least identical short- and median-term results, but a lower perioperative morbidity than TUR-P For several minimally-invasive techniques, indications are limited. TUMT TUNA, WIT and laser-coagulation all produce a coagulation necrosis of the prostatic tissue by thermic damage with secondary tissue shrinking. Urodynamic results however, are not comparable to TUR-P or Laser-TUR-P, and significantly more secondary interventions within 2 to 5 years are required. Minimal-invasive techniques present a favorable alternative for younger patients without complications of BPH, and for older patients with relevant comorbidities, and can usually be performed under local anaesthesia. The morbidity is low and further therapies remain possible later, if necessary.

Predicting prostate cancer-specific outcome after radical prostatectomy among men with very high-risk cT3b/4 PCa: a multi-institutional outcome study of 266 patients

BACKGROUND The value of radical prostatectomy (RP) as an approach for very high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients is controversial. To examine the risk of 10-year cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and other-cause mortality (OCM) according to clinical and pathological characteristics of very high-risk cT3b/4 PCa patients treated with RP as the primary treatment option. METHODS In a multi-institutional cohort, 266 patients with very high-risk cT3b/4 PCa treated with RP were identified. All patients underwent RP and pelvic lymph-node dissection. Competing-risk analyses assessed 10-year CSM and OCM before and after stratification for age and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). RESULTS Overall, 34 (13%) patients died from PCa and 73 (28%) from OCM. Ten-year CSM and OCM rates ranged from 5.6% to 12.9% and from 10% to 38%, respectively. OCM was the leading cause of death in all subgroups. Age and comorbidities were the main determinants of OCM. In healthy men, CSM rate did not differ among age groups (10-year CSM rate for ⩽64, 65-69 and ⩾70 years: 16.2%, 11.5% and 17.1%, respectively). Men with a CCI ⩾1 showed a very low risk of CSM irrespective of age (10-year CSM: 5.6-6.1%), whereas the 10-year OCM rates increased with age up to 38% in men ⩾70 years. CONCLUSION Very high-risk cT3b/4 PCa represents a heterogeneous group. We revealed overall low CSM rates despite the highly unfavorable clinical disease. For healthy men, CSM was independent of age, supporting RP even for older men. Conversely, less healthy patients had the highest risk of dying from OCM while sharing very low risk of CSM, indicating that this group might not benefit from an aggressive surgical treatment. Outcome after RP as the primary treatment option in cT3b/4 PCa patients is related to age and comorbidity status.