We evaluated the early oncological end point of recurrence-free survival in patients with renal cell carcinoma up-staged from cT1 to pT3a after partial nephrectomy. We also aimed to establish preoperative factors associated with pathological tumor up-staging. A prospective database of robotic partial nephrectomy cases performed at 5 academic centers was queried for patients who underwent surgery for a solitary cT1 renal mass. Patients with pT1-2 renal cell carcinoma were compared to those with pT3a tumors to determine the difference in recurrence-free survival. Preoperative factors associated with cT1 to pT3a up-staging were studied using multivariate logistic regression analysis. A total of 1,096 patients underwent robotic partial nephrectomy for a cT1 renal mass. At final pathological evaluation 855 tumors (78.0%) were found to be renal cell carcinoma, of which 41 (4.8%) were up-staged to pT3a. The 24-month recurrence-free survival estimates for pT1-2 and pT3a tumors were 99.2% and 91.8%, respectively (p=0.003). Multivariate analysis revealed that a high vs low R.E.N.A.L. (radius, exophytic/endophytic, nearness to collecting system or sinus, anterior/posterior and location relative to polar lines) nephrometry score was associated with tumor up-staging (OR 2.97, 95% CI 1.20-7.35, p=0.02). On separate multivariate analysis increasing tumor diameter (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.32-2.08, p<0.001) and hilar location (OR 2.83, 95% CI 1.43-5.61, p=0.003) were also associated with up-staging. At short-term followup patients with renal cell carcinoma up-staged from cT1 to pT3a have reasonable oncological outcomes after partial nephrectomy. Factors associated with tumor up-staging include high tumor complexity, increasing tumor diameter and hilar location. Further studies are needed to determine the comparative efficacy of partial vs radical nephrectomy for small pT3a tumors.

We prospectively evaluated the diagnostic performance of prostate specific membrane antigen targeted 18F-DCFPyL positron emission tomography/computerized tomography in the preoperative staging of men at high risk for harboring metastatic prostate cancer despite a negative conventional staging evaluation. Men with clinically localized high or very high risk prostate cancer were imaged with 18F-DCFPyL positron emission tomography/computerized tomography before undergoing radical prostatectomy with standardized pelvic lymph node dissection. The scans were interpreted by 2 blinded nuclear medicine readers and assessed for interreader variability as well as diagnostic accuracy for pelvic lymph node staging. Surgical pathology served as the reference standard to which 18F-DCFPyL scan findings were compared. A total of 25 men contributed analyzable data to this study. Seven of these patients (28%) were found to have 1 or more positive lymph nodes on surgical pathology. Sites of radiotracer uptake were identified in the prostate of all imaged patients. The 2 readers identified the same number of prostatic lesions in 22 patients (88%), of whom all had at least 1 intraprostatic lesion in common between the 2 reads. Additionally, the readers assigned the same N stage to 46 of 50 individual lymph node packets (92%). Following reconciliation of the relatively few discordant imaging reads, 7 patients (28%) were found to have 1 or more sites of radiotracer uptake in the pelvis consistent with N1 disease, resulting in 71.4% sensitivity (95% CI 29.0-96.3) and 88.9% specificity (95% CI 65.3-98.6). Analysis at the level of individual nodal packets resulted in 66.7% sensitivity (95% CI 29.9-92.5) and 92.7% specificity (95% CI 80.1-98.5). Three men (12%) had evidence of M1a disease. 18F-DCFPyL positron emission tomography/computerized tomography allowed for accurate detection of prostate cancer sites in men believed to have clinically localized disease based on conventional imaging. Our results support the need for a larger study to more precisely define the diagnostic accuracy of this novel molecular imaging test.

Transperineal prostate biopsy is associated with a significantly lower risk of infectious complications than the transrectal approach. In fact, the risk of infectious complications with transperineal prostate biopsy is so low that the utility of administering periprocedural antibiotics with this procedure has come under question. To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess for differences in the rates of infectious complications (septic, nonseptic, and overall) after performing transperineal prostate biopsy with and without the administration of periprocedural antibiotic prophylaxis. Three electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE) were searched, and studies were included if they included patients who underwent transperineal prostate biopsy, were published after January 2000, included information on periprocedural antibiotic administration, and reported postbiopsy complications. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality guidelines were utilized. A total of 106 unique studies describing 112 cohorts of patients were identified, of which 98 (37 805 men) received antibiotic prophylaxis and 14 (4772 men) did not receive it. All patients were included in the analysis of septic complications. In total, there were 19/37 805 (0.05%) episodes of sepsis in the group of men who received antibiotics, which was similar to the no antibiotic group with 4/4772 (0.08%) episodes (p = 0.2). For overall infections (septic plus nonseptic), there were 403/29 880 (1.35%) versus 58/4772 (1.22%) events among men with evaluable data who received and did not receive antibiotic prophylaxis, respectively (p = 0.8). Restricting our analysis to studies with a comparable low number of biopsy cores (<25 cores), there remained no difference in the rates of sepsis between groups, but there was a small, statistically significant lower risk of infectious complications with antibiotic administration—67/12 140 (0.55%) versus 58/4772 (1.22%; p < 0.01). The likelihood of septic infections after transperineal prostate biopsy is low with and without antibiotic prophylaxis. The omission of periprocedural antibiotics with this procedure stands to benefit patients by avoiding potential drug reactions. Furthermore, this practice is in line with calls throughout the medical community for improved antibiotic stewardship. In a large systematic review and meta-analysis, we evaluated infectious complications after transperineal prostate biopsy with or without the administration of prophylactic antibiotics. We conclude that prophylactic antibiotics do not decrease the rate of postbiopsy sepsis but may have a small benefit in terms of preventing less serious infections.