World Journal of Urology

, Volume 36, Issue 4, pp 603–608 | Cite as

Novel technology of molecular radio-guidance for lymph node dissection in recurrent prostate cancer by PSMA-ligands

  • Isabel Rauscher
  • Thomas Horn
  • Matthias Eiber
  • Jürgen E. Gschwend
  • Tobias Maurer
Topic Paper



Recently, prostate-specific membrane antigen-radioguided surgery (PSMA-RGS) has been introduced as a promising new and individual treatment concept in patients with localised recurrent prostate cancer (PC). In the following, we want to review our experience with PSMA-RGS in patients with localised biochemical recurrent PC.


A non-systematic review of the literature was carried out with focus on technical and logistical aspects of PSMA-RGS. Furthermore, published data on intraoperative detection of metastatic lesions compared to preoperative PSMA-PET and postoperative histopathology, postoperative complications as well as oncological follow-up data are summarized. Finally, relevant aspects on prerequisites for PSMA-RGS, patient selection, and the potential benefit of additional salvage radiotherapy or potential future applications of robotic PSMA-RGS with drop-in γ-probes are discussed.


First results show that PSMA-RGS is very sensitive and specific in tracking suspicious lesions intraoperatively. Prerequisite for patient selection and localisation of tumour recurrence is a positive Ga-HBED-CC PSMA positron-emission tomography (PET) scan with preferably only singular soft tissue or lymph node recurrence after primary treatment. Furthermore, PSMA-RGS has the potential to positively influence oncological outcome.


PSMA-RGS seems to be of high value in patients with localised PC recurrence for exact localisation and resection of oftentimes small metastatic lesions using intraoperative and ex vivo γ-probe measurements. However, patient identification on the basis of Ga-HBED-CC-PSMA PET imaging as well as clinical parameters is crucial to obtain satisfactory results.


Salvage surgery Oligometastatic Prostate cancer PSA PSMA Radioguided surgery 


Author’s contribution

I Rauscher: Protocol/project development, Data collection and management, Data analysis, Manuscript writing and editing. T Horn: Data collection and management, Data analysis, Manuscript writing and editing. M Eiber: Protocol/project development, Data analysis, Manuscript writing and editing. JE Gschwend: Protocol/project development, Manuscript writing and editing. T Maurer: Protocol/project development, Data collection and management, Data analysis, Manuscript writing and editing.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest or competing interests.

Research involving human participants

All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed written consent was obtained from all individual participants included in this study.


  1. 1.
    Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A (2014) Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin 64(1):9–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boorjian SA, Thompson RH, Tollefson MK, Rangel LJ, Bergstralh EJ, Blute ML et al (2011) Long-term risk of clinical progression after biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy: the impact of time from surgery to recurrence. Eur Urol 59(6):893–899PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Umbehr MH, Muntener M, Hany T, Sulser T, Bachmann LM (2013) The role of 11C-choline and 18F-fluorocholine positron emission tomography (PET) and PET/CT in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 64(1):106–117PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Afshar-Oromieh A, Zechmann CM, Malcher A, Eder M, Eisenhut M, Linhart HG et al (2014) Comparison of PET imaging with a (68)Ga-labelled PSMA ligand and (18)F-choline-based PET/CT for the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 41(1):11–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eiber M, Maurer T, Souvatzoglou M, Beer AJ, Ruffani A, Haller B et al (2015) Evaluation of hybrid (6)(8)Ga-PSMA ligand PET/CT in 248 patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Nucl Med 56(5):668–674PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Morigi JJ, Stricker PD, van Leeuwen PJ, Tang R, Ho B, Nguyen Q et al (2015) Prospective comparison of 18F-fluoromethylcholine versus 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer patients who have rising PSA after curative treatment and are being considered for targeted therapy. J Nucl Med 56(8):1185–1190PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Afshar-Oromieh A, Avtzi E, Giesel FL, Holland-Letz T, Linhart HG, Eder M et al (2015) The diagnostic value of PET/CT imaging with the (68)Ga-labelled PSMA ligand HBED-CC in the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 42(2):197–209PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Weineisen M, Simecek J, Schottelius M, Schwaiger M, Wester HJ (2014) Synthesis and preclinical evaluation of DOTAGA-conjugated PSMA ligands for functional imaging and endoradiotherapy of prostate cancer. EJNMMI Res 4(1):63PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Weineisen M, Schottelius M, Simecek J, Baum RP, Yildiz A, Beykan S et al (2015) 68 Ga- and 177Lu-labeled PSMA I&T: optimization of a PSMA-targeted theranostic concept and first proof-of-concept human studies. J Nucl Med 56(8):1169–1176PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Herrmann K, Bluemel C, Weineisen M, Schottelius M, Wester HJ, Czernin J et al (2015) Biodistribution and radiation dosimetry for a probe targeting prostate-specific membrane antigen for imaging and therapy. J Nucl Med 56(6):855–861PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Eder M, Schafer M, Bauder-Wust U, Hull WE, Wangler C, Mier W et al (2012) 68 Ga-complex lipophilicity and the targeting property of a urea-based PSMA inhibitor for PET imaging. Bioconjug Chem 23(4):688–697PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Perera M, Papa N, Christidis D, Wetherell D, Hofman MS, Murphy DG et al (2016) Sensitivity, specificity, and predictors of positive 68 Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in advanced prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 70(6):926–937PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Meredith G, Wong D, Yaxley J, Coughlin G, Thompson L, Kua B et al (2016) The use of 68 Ga-PSMA PET CT in men with biochemical recurrence after definitive treatment of acinar prostate cancer. BJU Int 118(Suppl 3):49–55PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schottelius M, Wirtz M, Eiber M, Maurer T, Wester HJ (2015) [(111)In]PSMA-I&T: expanding the spectrum of PSMA-I&T applications towards SPECT and radioguided surgery. EJNMMI Res 5(1):68PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Maurer T, Weirich G, Schottelius M, Weineisen M, Frisch B, Okur A et al (2015) Prostate-specific membrane antigen-radioguided surgery for metastatic lymph nodes in prostate cancer. Eur Urol 68(3):530–534PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Robu S, Schottelius M, Eiber M, Maurer T, Gschwend J, Schwaiger M et al (2017) Preclinical evaluation and first patient application of 99mTc-PSMA-I&S for SPECT imaging and radioguided surgery in prostate cancer. J Nucl Med 58(2):235–242PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Maurer T, Schwamborn K, Schottelius M, Wester HJ, Schwaiger M, Gschwend JE et al (2016) PSMA theranostics using PET and subsequent radioguided surgery in recurrent prostate cancer. Clin Genitourin Cancer 14(5):e549–e552PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rauscher I, Maurer T, Souvatzoglou M, Beer AJ, Vag T, Wirtz M et al (2016) Intrapatient comparison of 111In-PSMA I&T SPECT/CT and hybrid 68 Ga-HBED-CC PSMA PET in patients with early recurrent prostate cancer. Clin Nucl Med 41(9):e397–e402PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Robu S, Schottelius M, Eiber M, Maurer T, Gschwend J, Schwaiger M et al (2016) Preclinical evaluation and first patient application of 99mTc-PSMA-I&S for SPECT imaging and radioguided surgery in prostate cancer. J Nucl Med 58(2):235–242PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Horn T, Rauscher I, Eiber M, Gschwend JE, Maurer T (2017) PSMA-radioguided surgery in localised recurrent prostate cancer. Der Urologe Ausg A 56(11):1417–1423PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jilg CA, Drendel V, Rischke HC, Beck T, Vach W, Schaal K et al (2017) Diagnostic accuracy of Ga-68-HBED-CC-PSMA-ligand-PET/CT before salvage lymph node dissection for recurrent prostate cancer. Theranostics 7(6):1770–1780PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rausch I, Bergmann H, Geist B, Schaffarich M, Hirtl A, Hacker M et al (2014) Variation of system performance, quality control standards and adherence to international FDG-PET/CT imaging guidelines. A national survey of PET/CT operations in Austria. Nuklearmedizin 53(6):242–248PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fendler WP, Eiber M, Beheshti M, Bomanji J, Ceci F, Cho S et al (2017) 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT: joint EANM and SNMMI procedure guideline for prostate cancer imaging: version 1.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 44(6):1014–1024PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rauscher I, Duwel C, Wirtz M, Schottelius M, Wester HJ, Schwamborn K et al (2017) Value of 111In-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-radioguided surgery for salvage lymphadenectomy in recurrent prostate cancer: correlation with histopathology and clinical follow-up. BJU Int 120(1):40–47PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rigatti P, Suardi N, Briganti A, Da Pozzo LF, Tutolo M, Villa L et al (2011) Pelvic/retroperitoneal salvage lymph node dissection for patients treated with radical prostatectomy with biochemical recurrence and nodal recurrence detected by [11C]choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Eur Urol 60(5):935–943PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Suardi N, Gandaglia G, Gallina A, Di Trapani E, Scattoni V, Vizziello D et al (2015) Long-term outcomes of salvage lymph node dissection for clinically recurrent prostate cancer: results of a single-institution series with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Eur Urol 67(2):299–309PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jilg CA, Rischke HC, Reske SN, Henne K, Grosu AL, Weber W et al (2012) Salvage lymph node dissection with adjuvant radiotherapy for nodal recurrence of prostate cancer. J Urol 188(6):2190–2197PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rischke HC, Schultze-Seemann W, Wieser G, Kronig M, Drendel V, Stegmaier P et al (2015) Adjuvant radiotherapy after salvage lymph node dissection because of nodal relapse of prostate cancer versus salvage lymph node dissection only. Strahlentherapie Onkologie 191(4):310–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    van Oosterom MN, Simon H, Mengus L, Welling MM, van der Poel HG, van den Berg NS et al (2016) Revolutionizing (robot-assisted) laparoscopic gamma tracing using a drop-in gamma probe technology. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 6(1):1–17PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Isabel Rauscher
    • 1
  • Thomas Horn
    • 2
  • Matthias Eiber
    • 1
  • Jürgen E. Gschwend
    • 2
  • Tobias Maurer
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Nuclear Medicine, Klinikum rechts der IsarTechnical University of MunichMunichGermany
  2. 2.Department of Urology, Klinikum rechts der IsarTechnical University of MunichMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations