Radical Prostatectomy Without Prior Biopsy? Final Histopathology of Radical Prostatectomies in 103 Consecutive Biopsy-naïve Patients Who Underwent Radical Prostatectomy.
Marie Semmler, Julian Marcon, Elena K Berg, Gerald B Schulz, Patrick Keller, Darjusch Askari, Sarah Takayama Fouladgar, Benazir Enzinger, Benedikt Ebner, Paulo L Pfitzinger, Stephan Ledderose, Philipp M Kazmierczak, Lennert Eismann, Alexander Buchner, Philipp Weinhold, Christian G Stief, Robert Bischoff
{"title":"Radical Prostatectomy Without Prior Biopsy? Final Histopathology of Radical Prostatectomies in 103 Consecutive Biopsy-naïve Patients Who Underwent Radical Prostatectomy.","authors":"Marie Semmler, Julian Marcon, Elena K Berg, Gerald B Schulz, Patrick Keller, Darjusch Askari, Sarah Takayama Fouladgar, Benazir Enzinger, Benedikt Ebner, Paulo L Pfitzinger, Stephan Ledderose, Philipp M Kazmierczak, Lennert Eismann, Alexander Buchner, Philipp Weinhold, Christian G Stief, Robert Bischoff","doi":"10.1016/j.euf.2026.06.030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Prostate biopsy for histological confirmation is the standard before radical prostatectomy (RP). However, some patients refuse biopsy despite highly suspicious imaging findings. This study aimed to evaluate final pathology, assess potential active surveillance (AS) eligibility, and exploratorily evaluate perioperative outcomes and short-term oncological biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival after biopsy-naïve RP (bnRP).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed a single-center cohort of patients who underwent bnRP with pT2-pT3 disease between 2019 and 2026. Final pathology was assessed, and potential AS eligibility was approximated using European Association of Urology-based low-risk and favorable intermediate-risk categories. Perioperative outcomes and short-term BCR-free survival were exploratorily compared between patients who underwent bnRP and those who underwent biopsy-confirmed RP (bcRP) using Kaplan-Meier estimation, log-rank testing, and a univariable Cox proportional hazards model.</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>In 103 consecutive bnRP specimens, prostate cancer was confirmed in all patients. Overall, 94% had clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Compared with 3081 consecutive patients who underwent bcRP, patients who underwent bnRP had fewer low-grade tumors and more locally advanced disease. Overall, 5.8% of the biopsy-naïve patients had International Society of Urological Pathology grade group 1 disease, but only one patient fulfilled the stricter AS approximation criteria. However, in total, 18% of the biopsy-naïve patients fulfilled broader AS criteria and might have warranted formal AS assessment. Exploratory analysis revealed no significant difference in short-term BCR-free survival between patients who underwent bnRP and those who underwent bcRP.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>In our single-center observational analysis of carefully selected patients, bnRP seemed safe and was associated with a high likelihood of csPCa. Nevertheless, the retrospective approximation of AS eligibility highlights that bnRP should be performed cautiously. Exploratory perioperative and short-term oncological analyses need prospective validation.</p>","PeriodicalId":12160,"journal":{"name":"European urology focus","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology focus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2026.06.030","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and objective: Prostate biopsy for histological confirmation is the standard before radical prostatectomy (RP). However, some patients refuse biopsy despite highly suspicious imaging findings. This study aimed to evaluate final pathology, assess potential active surveillance (AS) eligibility, and exploratorily evaluate perioperative outcomes and short-term oncological biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival after biopsy-naïve RP (bnRP).
Methods: We retrospectively analyzed a single-center cohort of patients who underwent bnRP with pT2-pT3 disease between 2019 and 2026. Final pathology was assessed, and potential AS eligibility was approximated using European Association of Urology-based low-risk and favorable intermediate-risk categories. Perioperative outcomes and short-term BCR-free survival were exploratorily compared between patients who underwent bnRP and those who underwent biopsy-confirmed RP (bcRP) using Kaplan-Meier estimation, log-rank testing, and a univariable Cox proportional hazards model.
Key findings and limitations: In 103 consecutive bnRP specimens, prostate cancer was confirmed in all patients. Overall, 94% had clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Compared with 3081 consecutive patients who underwent bcRP, patients who underwent bnRP had fewer low-grade tumors and more locally advanced disease. Overall, 5.8% of the biopsy-naïve patients had International Society of Urological Pathology grade group 1 disease, but only one patient fulfilled the stricter AS approximation criteria. However, in total, 18% of the biopsy-naïve patients fulfilled broader AS criteria and might have warranted formal AS assessment. Exploratory analysis revealed no significant difference in short-term BCR-free survival between patients who underwent bnRP and those who underwent bcRP.
Conclusions and clinical implications: In our single-center observational analysis of carefully selected patients, bnRP seemed safe and was associated with a high likelihood of csPCa. Nevertheless, the retrospective approximation of AS eligibility highlights that bnRP should be performed cautiously. Exploratory perioperative and short-term oncological analyses need prospective validation.
背景与目的:前列腺活检组织学证实是根治性前列腺切除术(RP)前的标准。然而,尽管有高度可疑的影像学发现,一些患者仍拒绝活检。本研究旨在评估biopsy-naïve RP (bnRP)后的最终病理,评估潜在的主动监测(AS)资格,并探索性评估围手术期结局和短期肿瘤生化复发(BCR)无生存率。方法:我们回顾性分析了2019年至2026年间接受bnRP的pT2-pT3疾病患者的单中心队列。对最终病理进行评估,并使用基于欧洲泌尿学协会的低风险和有利的中风险类别来估计潜在的AS资格。采用Kaplan-Meier估计、log-rank检验和单变量Cox比例风险模型,探索性地比较了bnRP患者和活检证实RP (bcRP)患者的围手术期结局和短期无bcr生存率。主要发现和局限性:在103个连续的bnRP标本中,所有患者均确诊为前列腺癌。总体而言,94%的患者有临床意义的前列腺癌(csPCa)。与连续接受bcRP治疗的3081例患者相比,接受bnRP治疗的患者有更少的低级别肿瘤和更多的局部晚期疾病。总体而言,biopsy-naïve患者中有5.8%患有国际泌尿病理学学会分级1组疾病,但只有1例患者符合更严格的AS近似标准。然而,总共有18%的biopsy-naïve患者符合更广泛的AS标准,可能需要正式的AS评估。探索性分析显示,接受bnRP和接受bcRP的患者短期无bcr生存率无显著差异。结论和临床意义:在我们精心挑选的患者的单中心观察分析中,bnRP似乎是安全的,并且与csPCa的高可能性相关。然而,AS资格的回顾性近似强调bnRP应谨慎执行。探索性围手术期和短期肿瘤分析需要前瞻性验证。
期刊介绍:
European Urology Focus is a new sister journal to European Urology and an official publication of the European Association of Urology (EAU).
EU Focus will publish original articles, opinion piece editorials and topical reviews on a wide range of urological issues such as oncology, functional urology, reconstructive urology, laparoscopy, robotic surgery, endourology, female urology, andrology, paediatric urology and sexual medicine. The editorial team welcome basic and translational research articles in the field of urological diseases. Authors may be solicited by the Editor directly. All submitted manuscripts will be peer-reviewed by a panel of experts before being considered for publication.