Surgical Techniques in UrologyUroLift in Place of Fiducial Markers for Patients With Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Undergoing External Beam Radiation Therapy
Section snippets
Patients
The medical records of 7 consecutive patients who underwent placement of UroLift for simultaneous treatment of obstructive LUTS due to BPH and targeting of EBRT for treatment of prostate cancer between September and December of 2015 were reviewed. Patients were considered eligible if they had moderate- to high-risk, localized prostate cancer that would make them typical candidates for EBRT as well as obstructive LUTS due to BPH. For inclusion into this study, patients must have failed medical
Results
Seven consecutive patients were included in this study. The general patient characteristics are shown in Table 1. The average age of patients was 65 years old, and all patients had medical comorbidities. Prior to placement of the UroLift system, all patients were trialed on medical therapy for LUTS for a minimum of 1 month, 3 of whom continued medical therapy after UroLift implantation. Immediately following placement of UroLift, 6 of 7 patients reported significant improvement in their LUTS,
Discussion
The UroLift system is a recently approved non-destructive surgical treatment for obstructive LUTS due to BPH that consists of small implants which pass from within the urethra to the prostatic capsule, compressing the prostate between them.2, 3 Both the intraurethral and extracapsular components of these implants are sufficiently radiopaque to be visible on a normal flat x-ray image. This suggests that in patients with UroLift implants who require EBRT for treatment of prostate cancer, the
Conclusion
In patients with comorbid localized high-risk prostate cancer and BPH with medical therapy-resistant LUTS, the dual use of the UroLift system for treatment of obstructive LUTS and replacement of fiducial markers may save time, cost, and risk. Although the current clip utilized in the UroLift system is generally radiopaque, it does not project well on the sagittal plane and would be significantly enhanced if a more strongly opaque substance was incorporated. It remains to be proven if the
References (24)
- et al.
Prostatic urethral lift: a minimally invasive treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia
Prostate Int
(2015) - et al.
Association of clinical benign prostate hyperplasia with prostate cancer incidence and mortality revisited: a nationwide cohort study of 3,009,258 men
Eur Urol
(2011) - et al.
Prostate cancer
Lancet
(2016) - et al.
Management of high-risk prostate cancer: radiation therapy and hormonal therapy
Cancer Treat Rev
(2013) - et al.
Developments in external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer
Urology
(2013) - et al.
Prostatic urethral lift: two-year results after treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia
Urology
(2012) - et al.
Prostate motion during standard radiotherapy as assessed by fiducial markers
Radiother Oncol
(1995) - et al.
Prostate position relative to pelvic bony anatomy based on intraprostatic gold markers and electronic portal imaging
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
(2005) - et al.
SIU/ICUD consultation on urethral strictures: posterior urethral stenosis after treatment of prostate cancer
Urology
(2014) - et al.
Risk of urinary incontinence following post-brachytherapy transurethral resection of the prostate and correlation with clinical and treatment parameters
J Urol
(2013)
The UroLift system for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia: a NICE medical technology guidance
Appl Health Econ Health Policy
What's truly minimally invasive in benign prostatic hyperplasia surgery?
Curr Opin Urol
Cited by (0)
Financial Disclosure: The authors declare that they have no relevant financial interests.