Search

Aims Accurate preoperative knowledge of tumour stage is important in preoperative planning at radical prostatectomy (RP). The aim of this study was to assess the predictive ability of multiparametric MRI for detecting pathological outcomes. Methods A retrospective review was performed of all patients who underwent RP over a 4 year period. Results Preoperative MRI was reported as showing T3 or T4 disease in 26(17.9%) out of 145 patients undergoing RP. Of these, 10(6.9%) had ECE (extra-capsular extension) and 1(0.7%) had SVI (seminal vesicle invasion) on final histology. The sensitivity and specificity of MRI for detecting ECE were 27.3% and 87.6%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of MRI for detecting SVI were 11.1% and 97.8%, respectively. The positive predictive values for determining ECE and SVI were 45.5% and 25%, respectively and negative predictive values were 75.9% and 94.4%. Conclusion MRI has good specificity but poor and heterogeneous sensitivity for predicting T3 disease in RP specimen., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest to report.

Many centres currently do not offer radical prostatectomy (RP) to men with high-risk localised prostate cancer due to concerns regarding poor outcome, despite evidence to the contrary. We identified 18 men undergoing RP with serum PSA >20 ng/ml (high-risk by National Comprehensive Cancer Network definition) and minimum follow-up of 12 years (mean 13.5). Mean preoperative PSA was 37.0 ng/ml (Range 21.1-94.0). Prostatectomy pathology reported extracapsular disease in 16 (88.9%), positive surgical margins in 15 (83%) and positive pelvic lymph nodes in 5 (27.8%). Overall and cancer-specific survival at 5 and 10-years was 83.3%, 88.2%, 72% and 76.5% respectively. With complete follow-up 11 (61.1%) are alive, and 5 (27.8%) avoided any adjuvant therapy. Complete continence (defined as no involuntary urine leakage and no use of pads) was achieved in 60%, with partial continence in the remainder. We conclude that surgery for this aggressive variant of localised prostate cancer can result in satisfactory outcome.

Waiting times for appointments for urological out-patients in Ireland and the U.K. can be excessively long. Nurse-led Lower Urinary Tract symptom (LUTs) pre-assessment clinics have been introduced to streamline patient care pathways. We examined whether a nurse-led pre-assessment LUTS clinic could result in the rapid assessment and discharge of patients following their first out-patient visit. A pilot study was undertaken whereby patients referred with LUTS were sent for pre-assessment prior to their out-patients appointment. 214 consecutive patients underwent pre-assessment. Of these, 39 (18%) patients were discharged following their first out-patient visit and 27 (13%) patients were discharged after a second attendance. A further 35 (16%) patients continued to attend but underwent no further investigations or treatment, and possibly should have been discharged earlier. Overall 46% of pre-assessed patients could have been discharged early from the urology clinic. In conclusion a nurse-led pre-assessment LUTS clinic could result in the rapid assessment and discharge of patients following their first out-patient visit.

The British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) has recently recommended guidelines for the management of Lower Urinary Tract Sypmtoms by GPs outlining the indications for urological referral. We wished to assess the prescription of medical therapy by GPs in the referrals to our LUTS pre-assessment clinic. 115 consecutive patients were reviewed prospectively, over a three month period. Each patient was assessed for International Prostatic Symptom Score (IPSS) and Bother Score, uroflowometry with post void residual and whether medical therapy had been commenced (D-Blocker or 5-D-Reductase inhibitor). The majority of patients (75%) were classified with moderate symptoms. Only 10% of those with moderate symptoms and 5% of those with severe symptoms were commenced on medical therapy by their GP as recommended by the BAUS guidelines. Only 30 patients (26%) had completed an IPSS form with their GP. The majority of patients referred to our service for assessment of LUTS have at least moderate symptom severity and are not prescribed medical therapy by their GP. Further primary care education with greater emphasis on the BAUS LUTS algorithm prior to referral to an urologist should be encouraged.