Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Is the systematic histological analysis of benign prostatic hyperplasia surgical specimen always necessary?

  • Urology - Original Paper
  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

After most surgical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), the resected tissue undergoes a histological examination. This examination is performed for the risk of finding an incidental prostate cancer (iPCa). The improvement of prostate cancer detection in the past few years decreased the global iPCa rate. This raises the question of the real benefit for all patients of a systematic histological analysis. The aim of our study was to evaluate the iPCa detection rate on a large contemporary cohort of patients treated for BPH, and to define predictive factors of iPCa detection.

Patients and methods

We retrospectively analyzed the medical charts of all consecutive patients who underwent surgical treatment for BPH in our academic center from 2012 to 2018. Patients with prostate cancer diagnosed before surgery were not included. All the resected tissue underwent standard histopathological examination. iPCa was defined by any grade or stage of prostate cancer identified on the resected tissue by the histological examination. The following variables were analyzed using an uni- and multi-variable logistic regression as potential risk factors of iPCa: age, total PSA, PSA density (PSAd), prostate volume, technique used, weight of resected tissue and use of 5ARI medication.

Results

1045 patients were included in the study. Of them, 439 (42.0%), 206 (19.7%) and 400 (38.3%) underwent HoLEP, OP and TURP, respectively. iPCa was diagnosed in 94 (9.0%) of the 1045. Among them 15 (1.4%) were clinically significant (ISUP score ≥ 2). The multivariable logistic regression analysis identified age (p = 0.03) and PSA density (p < 0.001) as independent predictive factors for the detection of iPCa. Using the median of age and PSAd, we identified a population with 0% of iPCa in our cohort (age < 70 year-old and PSAd < 0.05 ng/mL/mL).

Conclusion

The global iPCa rate was 9% in this contemporary large cohort of patients who underwent surgical treatment for BPH, with 1.4% of clinically significant cancer. Age and PSAd were independent predictive factors to find iPCa. Patients younger than 70 with a PSAd < 0.05 ng/mL/mL had 0% of iPCA in our cohort. In this specific population, we could probably avoid a systematical histological examination of the resected tissue.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cho A, Chughtai B, Te AE (2020) Benign prostatic hyperplasia and male lower urinary tract symptoms: epidemiology and risk factors. Curr Bladder Dysfunct Rep 15(2):60–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Madersbacher S, Lackner J, Brössner C, Röhlich M, Stancik I, Willinger M et al (2005) Reoperation, myocardial infarction and mortality after transurethral and open prostatectomy: a nation-wide, long-term analysis of 23,123 cases. Eur Urol 47(4):499–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Adolfsson J (2008) The management of category T1a–T1b (incidental) prostate cancer: can we predict who needs treatment? Eur Urol 54(1):16–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Catalona WJ (2018) Prostate cancer screening. Med Clin North Am 102(2):199–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Mai KT, Isotalo PA, Green J, Perkins DG, Morash C, Collins JP (2000) Incidental prostatic adenocarcinomas and putative premalignant lesions in TURP specimens collected before and after the introduction of prostrate-specific antigen screening. Arch Pathol Lab Med 124(10):1454–1456

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Zigeuner RE, Lipsky K, Riedler I, Auprich M, Schips L, Salfellner M et al (2003) Did the rate of incidental prostate cancer change in the era of PSA testing? A retrospective study of 1127 patients. Urology 62(3):451–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Pirša M, Pezelj I, Knežević M, Spajić B, Tomašković I, Reljić A et al (2018) Incidental prostate cancer in patients treated for benign prostate hyperplasia in the period of 21 years. Acta Clin Croat 57(Suppl 1):71–76

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. He G, Sun C, Shu Y, Wang B, Du C, Chen J et al (2020) The diagnostic value of prostate cancer between holmium laser enucleation of the prostate and transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a retrospective comparative study. Int J Surg Lond Engl 79:217–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Porreca A, Giampaoli M, Bianchi L, D’Agostino D, Romagnoli D, Bianchi FM et al (2019) Preoperative multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging: a safe clinical practice to reduce incidental prostate cancer in Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. Cent Eur J Urol 72(2):106–112

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hibon G, Léonard G, Franceschi A, Misrai V, Bruyère F (2017) A bicentric comparative and prospective study between classic photovaporization and anatomical greenlight laser vaporization for large-volume prostatic adenomas. Prog En Urol 27(8–9):482–488

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Misraï V, Kerever S, Pasquie M, Bordier B, Guillotreau J, Palasse J et al (2019) Does mechanical morcellation of large glands compromise incidental prostate cancer detection on specimen analysis? A pathological comparison with open simple prostatectomy. World J Urol 37(7):1315–1320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Otsubo S, Yokomizo A, Mochida O, Shiota M, Tatsugami K, Inokuchi J et al (2015) Significance of prostate-specific antigen-related factors in incidental prostate cancer treated by holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. World J Urol 33(3):329–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Elkoushy MA, Elshal AM, Elhilali MM (2015) Incidental prostate cancer diagnosis during holmium laser enucleation: assessment of predictors, survival, and disease progression. Urology 86(3):552–557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Rosenhammer B, Lausenmeyer EM, Mayr R, Burger M, Eichelberg C (2018) Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate provides similar incidental prostate cancer detection rates as open prostatectomy: a matched pair analysis. Urol Int 101(4):382–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Rosenhammer B, Lausenmeyer EM, Mayr R, Burger M, Eichelberg C (2018) HoLEP provides a higher prostate cancer detection rate compared to bipolar TURP: a matched-pair analysis. World J Urol 36(12):2035–2041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Herlemann A, Wegner K, Roosen A, Buchner A, Weinhold P, Bachmann A et al (2017) “Finding the needle in a haystack”: oncologic evaluation of patients treated for LUTS with holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) versus transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). World J Urol 35(11):1777–1782

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M, Panebianco V, Mynderse LA, Vaarala MH et al (2018) MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med 378(19):1767–1777

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Giampaoli M, Bianchi L, D’agostino D, Corsi P, Romagnoli D, Mineo FB et al (2019) Can preoperative multiparametric MRI avoid unnecessary prostate biopsies before holmium laser enucleation of the prostate? Preliminary results of a multicentric cohort of patients. Minerva Urol E Nefrol Ital J Urol Nephrol 71(5):524–530

    Google Scholar 

  19. Morton A, Williams M, Perera M, Teloken PE, Donato P, Ranasinghe S, Chung E, Bolton D, Yaxley J, Roberts MJ (2020) Management of benign prostatic hyperplasia in the 21st century: temporal trends in Australian population-based data. BJU Int 126(Suppl 1):18–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.15098 (Epub 2020 Jun 17 PMID: 32558340)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Urology Department, Cochin Hospital, Paris, France

    R. Coman, J. Anract, M. Peyromaure & Barry Delongchamps

  2. Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania

    R. Coman

  3. Institut Necker Enfants Malades (INEM), INSERM U1151, Université de Paris, Paris, France

    J. Anract, M. Peyromaure & Barry Delongchamps

  4. Urology Department, Pitié-Salpétrière Hospital, Paris, France

    U. Pinar

  5. Pathology Department, Cochin Hospital, Paris, France

    M. Sibony

Authors
  1. R. Coman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Anract
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. U. Pinar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. Sibony
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M. Peyromaure
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Barry Delongchamps
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Anract.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All of the authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the national research comittee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained for all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Coman, R., Anract, J., Pinar, U. et al. Is the systematic histological analysis of benign prostatic hyperplasia surgical specimen always necessary?. Int Urol Nephrol 54, 1485–1489 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-022-03220-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-022-03220-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation