Diagnostic Yield and Miss Rate of EndoRings in an Organized Colorectal Cancer Screening Program: the SMART (Study Methodology for ADR-Related Technology) Trial

Background and aims The add-on EndoRings has been claimed to improve adenoma detection at colonoscopy, but available data are inconsistent. When testing a new technology, parallel and crossover methodologies measure different outcomes, leaving uncertainty on their correspondence. Aims of this study were to compare the diagnostic yield and miss rate of the EndoRings for colorectal neoplasia. Methods Consecutive subjects undergoing colonoscopy after a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) within organized screening program in 7 Italian centers, were randomized between a parallel (EndoRings or Standard) or a crossover (EndoRings/Standard or Standard/EndoRings) methodology. Outcomes measures were the detection rates of (advanced) adenomas (A-)ADR in the parallel arms and miss rate of adenomas in the crossover arms. Results Of 958 eligible subjects, 927 (317 EndoRings; 317 Standard; 142 EndoRings/Standard; 151 Standard/Endorings) were included in the final analysis. In the parallel arms (mean ADR: 51.3%; mean AADR: 25.4%), no difference between Standard and EndoRings was found for both ADR (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.95-1.28) and A-ADR (RR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.88-1.51), as well as for the mean number of adenomas and advanced adenomas per patient (EndoRings: 1.9±1.3 and 1.0±1.2; Standard 2.1±1.5 and 1.0±1.2; p=NS for both comparisons). In the crossover arms, no difference in miss rate for adenomas between EndoRings and Standard was found at per-polyp (RR, 1.43; 95% CI, 0.97-2.10), as well as at per-patient analysis (24% vs 26%; p=0.76). Conclusions No statistically significant difference in diagnostic yield and miss rate between EndoRings and Standard colonoscopy was detected in FIT+ patients. A clinically relevant correspondence between miss and detection rates was shown, supporting a cause-effect relationship

Different approaches for bladder neck dissection during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: the Aalst technique

ABSTRACT Introduction: Bladder neck dissection is one of the most delicate surgical steps of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) [1, 2], and it may affect surgical margins rate and functional outcomes [3, 4]. Given the relationship between outcomes and surgical experience [5–7], it is crucial to implement a step-by-step approach for each surgical step of the procedure, especially in the most challenging part of the intervention. In this video compilation, we described the techniques for bladder neck dissection utilized at OLV Hospital (Aalst, Belgium). Surgical Technique: We illustrated five different techniques for bladder neck dissection during RARP. The anterior technique tackles the bladder neck from above until the urethral catheter is visualized, and then the dissection is completed posteriorly. The lateral and postero-lateral approaches involve the identification of a weakness point at the prostate-vesical junction and aim to develop the posterior plane – virtually until the seminal vesicles – prior to the opening of the urethra anteriorly. Finally, we described our techniques for bladder neck dissection in more challenging cases such as in patients with bulky middle lobes and prior surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia. All approaches follow anatomic landmarks to minimize positive surgical margins and aim to preserve the bladder neck in order to promote optimal functional recovery. All procedures were performed with DaVinci robotic platforms using a 3-instruments configuration (scissors, fenestrated bipolar, and needle driver). As standard protocol at our Institution, urinary catheter was removed on postoperative day two [8]. Conclusions: Five different approaches for bladder neck dissection during RARP were described in this video compilation. We believe that the technical details provided here might be of help for clinicians who are starting their practice with this surgical intervention

The Impact of PSMA-PET on Oncologic Control in Prostate Cancer Patients Who Experienced PSA Persistence or Recurrence

Simple Summary PSMA-PET is currently recommended to restage PCa and to guide salvage treatments. We aim to evaluate the oncologic outcomes of patients with recurrent PCa who received PSMA-PET. PSMA-PET may be a prognostic tool in BCR patients after PR. In recurrent PCa patients who never received previous salvage therapies, men with positive PSMA-PET had similar oncologic outcomes compared to those with negative PSMA-PET. PCa patients who already had previous salvage therapies with positive PSMA-PET experienced worse oncologic outcomes compared to those with negative PSMA-PET. In a PSMA-PET positive population no significant differences were found in terms of progression and metastasis between patients with oligometastatic vs. polimetastatic disease and local/N1 vs. M1 at PSMA-PET. Background: Prostate Specific Membrane Antigen-Positron Emission Tomography (PSMA-PET) is currently recommended to restage prostate cancer (PCa) and to guide the delivery of salvage treatments. We aim to evaluate the oncologic outcomes of patients with recurrent PCa who received PSMA-PET. Methods: 324 hormone-sensitive PCa with PSA relapse after radical prostatectomy who underwent PSMA-PET in three high-volume European Centres. Patients have been stratified as pre-salvage who never received salvage treatments (n = 134), and post-salvage, including patients who received previous salvage therapies (n = 190). Patients with oligorecurrent (<= 3 lesions), PSMA-positive disease underwent PSMA-directed treatments: salvage radiotherapy (sRT) or Metastases-directed therapy (MDT). Patients with polirecurrent (>3 lesions) PSMA-positive disease were treated with systemic therapy. Patients with negative PSMA-PET were treated with sRT or systemic therapies or observation. The primary outcome of the study was Progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary outcomes were: Metastases-free survival (MFS) and Castration Resistant Pca free survival (CRPC-FS). Results: median follow up was 23 months. In the pre-salvage setting, the PFS, MFS and CRPC-FS estimates at 3 years were 66.2% vs. 38.9%, 95.2% vs. 73.7% and 94.9% vs. 93.1% in patients with negative vs. positive PSMA-PET, respectively (all p >= 0.2). In the post-salvage setting, the PFS, MFS and CRPC-FS estimates at 3 years were 59.5% vs. 29.1%, 92.7% vs. 65.1% and 98.8% vs. 88.8% in patients with negative vs. positive PSMA-PET, respectively (all p <= 0.01). At multivariable analyses, a positive PSMA-PET was an independent predictor of progression (HR = 2.15) and metastatic disease (HR 2.37; all p <= 0.03). Conclusion: PSMA-PET in recurrent PCa detects the site of recurrence guiding salvage treatments and has a prognostic role in patients who received previous salvage treatments

Robot-assisted adrenalectomy: Step-by-step technique and surgical outcomes at a high-volume robotic center

Objective: In the last years, robotic surgery was introduced in several different settings with good perioperative results. However, its role in the management of adrenal masses is still debated. In order to provide a contribution to this field, we described our step-by-step technique for robotic adrenalectomy (RA) and related modifications according to the type of adrenal mass treated. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 27 consecutive patients who underwent RA at Onze-Lieve-Vrouw hospital (Aalst, Belgium) between January 2009 and October 2022. Demographic, intra- and post-operative, and pathological data were retrieved from our prospectively maintained institutional database. Continuous variables are summarized as median and interquartile range (IQR). Categorical variables are reported as frequencies (percentages). Results: Twenty-seven patients underwent RA were included in the study. Median age, body mass index, and Charlson's comorbidity index were 61 (IQR: 49–71) years, 26 (IQR: 24–29) kg/m2, and 2 (IQR: 0–3), respectively, and 16 (59.3%) patients were male. Median tumor size at computed tomography scan was 6.0 (IQR: 3.5–8.0) cm. Median operative time and blood loss were 105 (IQR: 82–120) min and 175 (IQR: 94–250) mL, respectively. No intraoperative complications were recorded. Overall postoperative complications rate was 11.1%, with a postoperative transfusion rate of 3.7%. A total of 10 (37.0%) patients harbored malignant adrenal masses. Among them, 3 (11.1%) had adrenocortical carcinoma, 6 (22.2%) secondary metastasis, and 1 (3.7%) malignant pheochromocytoma on final pathological exam. Only 1 (10.0%) patient had positive surgical margins. Conclusion: We described our step-by-step technique for RA, which can be safely performed even in case of high challenging settings as malignant tumors, pheochromocytoma, and large masses. The standardization of perioperative protocol should be encouraged to maximize the outcomes of this complex surgical procedure

PSMA-PET Guided Treatment in Prostate Cancer Patients with Oligorecurrent Progression after Previous Salvage Treatment

Background: Prostate Specific Membrane Antigen-Positron Emission Tomography (PSMA-PET) is used to select recurrent prostate cancer (PCa) patients for metastases-directed therapy (MDT). We aimed to evaluate the oncologic outcomes of second-line PSMA-guided MDT in oligo-recurrent PCa patients. Methods: we performed a retrospective analysis of 113 recurrent PCa after previous radical prostatectomy and salvage therapies with oligorecurrent disease at PSMA-PET (≤3 lesions in N1/M1a-b) in three high-volume European centres. Patients underwent second-line salvage treatments: MDT targeted to PSMA (including surgery and/or radiotherapy), and the conventional approach (observation or Androgen Deprivation Therapy [ADT]). Patients were stratified according to treatments (MDT vs. conventional approach). Patients who underwent MDT were stratified according to stage in PSMA-PET (N1 vs. M1a-b). The primary outcome of the study was Progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary outcomes were Metastases-free survival (MFS) and Castration Resistant PCa free survival (CRPC-FS). Kaplan-Meier analyses assessed PFS, MFS and CRPC-FS. Multivariable Cox regression models identified predictors of progression and metastatic disease. Results: Overall, 91 (80%) and 22 (20%) patients were treated with MDT and the conventional approach, respectively. The median follow-up after PSMA-PET was 31 months. Patients who underwent MDT had a similar PFS compared to the conventional approach (p = 0.3). Individuals referred to MDT had significantly higher MFS and CRPC-FS compared to those who were treated with the conventional approach (73.5% and 94.7% vs. 30.5% and 79.5%; all p ≤ 0.001). In patients undergoing MDT, no significant differences were found for PFS and MFS according to N1 vs. M1a-b disease, while CRPC-FS estimates were significantly higher in patients with N1 vs. M1a-b (100% vs. 86.1%; p = 0.02). At multivariable analyses, age (HR = 0.96) and ADT during second line salvage treatment (HR = 0.5) were independent predictors of PFS; MDT (HR 0.27) was the only independent predictor of MFS (all p ≤ 0.04) Conclusion: Patients who underwent second-line PSMA-guided MDT experienced higher MFS and CRPC-FS compared to men who received conventional management