Background: The accuracy of multi-parametric MRI (mpMRI) in the pre-operative staging of prostate cancer (PCa) remains controversial. Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of mpMRI to accurately predict PCa extra-prostatic extension (EPE) on a side-specific basis using a risk-stratified 5-point Likert scale. This study also aimed to assess the influence of mpMRI scan quality on diagnostic accuracy. Patients and Methods: We included 124 men who underwent robot-assisted RP (RARP) as part of the NeuroSAFE PROOF study at our centre. Three radiologists retrospectively reviewed mpMRI blinded to RP pathology and assigned a Likert score (1–5) for EPE on each side of the prostate. Each scan was also ascribed a Prostate Imaging Quality (PI-QUAL) score for assessing the quality of the mpMRI scan, where 1 represents the poorest and 5 represents the best diagnostic quality. Outcome measurements and statistical analyses: Diagnostic performance is presented for the binary classification of EPE, including 95% confidence intervals and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: A total of 231 lobes from 121 men (mean age 56.9 years) were evaluated. Of these, 39 men (32.2%), or 43 lobes (18.6%), had EPE. A Likert score ≥3 had a sensitivity (SE), specificity (SP), NPV, and PPV of 90.4%, 52.3%, 96%, and 29.9%, respectively, and the AUC was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.77–0.86). The AUC was 0.76 (95% CI: 0.64–0.88), 0.78 (0.72–0.84), and 0.92 (0.88–0.96) for biparametric scans, PI-QUAL 1–3, and PI-QUAL 4–5 scans, respectively. Conclusions: MRI can be used effectively by genitourinary radiologists to rule out EPE and help inform surgical planning for men undergoing RARP. EPE prediction was more reliable when the MRI scan was (a) multi-parametric and (b) of a higher image quality according to the PI-QUAL scoring system.

Background: Two million non-emergency surgeries are being cancelled globally every week due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which will have a major impact on patients and healthcare systems.Objective: To determine whether it is feasible and safe to continue non-emergency surgery in the COVID-19 pandemicDesign, setting and participants: This is a cohort study of 500 consecutive patients undergoing non-emergency surgery in a dedicated COVID-19 cold site following the first case of COVID-19 that was reported in the institution. The study was carried out during the peak of the pandemic in the United Kingdom, which currently has one of the highest number of cases and deaths from COVID-19 globally.We set up a hub-and-spoke surgical network amongst 14 National Health Service institutions during the pandemic. The hub was a cancer centre, which was converted into a COVID-19 cold site, performing urological, thoracic, gynaecological and general surgical operations.Outcomes: The primary outcome was 30-day mortality from COVID-19. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality and post-operative complications at 30-days.Results: 500 patients underwent surgery with median age 62.5 (IQR 51-71). 65% were male and 60% had a known diagnosis of cancer. 44% of surgeries were performed with robotic or laparoscopic assistance and 61% were considered complex or major operations.None of the 500 patients undergoing surgery died from COVID-19 at 30-days. 30-day allcause mortality was 3/500 (1%). 10 (2%) patients were diagnosed with COVID-19, 4 (1%) with confirmed laboratory diagnosis and 6 (1%) with probable COVID-19. 33/500 (7%) of patients developed Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher complications, with 1/33 (3%) occurring in a patient with COVID-19.Conclusion: It is safe to continue non-emergency surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic with appropriate service reconfiguration.Patient summary: No patients died from COVID-19 when undergoing non-emergency surgery during the pandemic in one of the worst affected world regions.