Prognostic role of platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in patients with non-metastatic and metastatic prostate cancer:A meta-analysis and systematic review

Objective: To analyze data available in the literature regarding a possible prognostic value of the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients stratified in non-metastatic and metastatic diseases.Methods: A literature search process was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. In our meta-analysis, the pooled event rate estimated and the pooled hazard ratio were calculated using a random effect model.Results: Forty-two articles were selected for our analysis. The pooled risk difference for non-organ confined PCa between high and low NLR cases was 0.06 (95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.03-0.15) and between high and low PLR cases increased to 0.30 (95% CI: 0.16-0.43). In non-metastatic PCa cases, the pooled hazard ratio for overall mortality between high and low NLR was 1.33 (95% CI: 0.78-1.88) and between high and low PLR was 1.47 (95% CI: 0.91-2.03), whereas in metastatic PCa cases, between high and low NLR was 1.79 (95% CI: 1.44-2.13) and between high and low PLR was 1.05 (95% CI: 0.87-1.24).Conclusion: The prognostic values of NLR and PLR in terms of PCa characteristics and responses after treatment show a high level of heterogeneity of results among studies. These two ratios can represent the inflammatory and immunity status of the patient related to several conditions. A higher predictive value is related to a high NLR in terms of risk for overall mortality in metastatic PCa cases under systemic treatments.

A systematic review of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy outcomes for advanced indications:Large tumors(cT2-T3),solitary kidney,completely endophytic,hilar,recurrent,and multiple renal tumors

Objective:Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy(RAPN)has become widely used for treatment of renal cell carcinoma and it is expanding in the field of complex renal masses.The aim of this systematic review was to analyze outcomes of RAPN for completely endophytic renal masses,large tumors(cT2-T3),renal cell carcinoma in solitary kidney,recurrent tumors,completely endophytic and hilar masses,and simultaneous and multiple tumors.Methods:A comprehensive search in the PubMed,Scopus,Web of Science,and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases was performed in December 2022 for English language papers.The primary endpoint was to evaluate the role of RAPN in the setting of each category of complex renal masses considered.The secondary endpoint was to evaluate the surgical and functional outcomes.Results:After screening 1250 records,43 full-text manuscripts were selected,comprising over 8500 patients.Twelve and thirteen studies reported data for endophytic and hilar renal masses,respectively.Five and three studies reported outcomes for cT2-T3 and solitary kidney patients,respectively.Four studies focused on redo-RAPN for recurrent tumors.Two studies investigated simultaneous bilateral renal masses and five reports focused on multiple tumor excision in ipsilateral kidney.Conclusion:Over the past decade,evidence supporting the use of RAPN for the most challenging nephron-sparing surgery indications has continuously grown.Although limitations remain including study design and lack of detailed long-term functional and oncological outcomes,the adoption of RAPN for the included advanced indications is associated with favorable surgical outcomes with good preservation of renal function without compromising the oncological result.Certainly,a higher likelihood of complication might be expected when facing extremely challenging cases.However,none of these indications should be considered per se an exclusion criterion for performing RAPN.Ultimately,a risk-adapted approach should be employed.

Minimally invasive surgical therapies(MISTs)for lower urinary tract symptoms(LUTS):promise or panacea?

The increasing importance of treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms(LUTS),while avoiding side effects and maintaining sexual function,has allowed for the development of minimally invasive surgical therapies(MiSTs).Recently,the European Association of Urology guidelines reported a paradigm shift from the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia(BPH)to the management of nonneurogenic male LUTS.The aim of the present review was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the most commonly used MisTs:ablative techniques such as aquablation,prostatic artery embolization,water vapor energy,and transperineal prostate laser ablation,and nonablative techniques such as prostatic urethral lift and temporarily implanted nitinol device(iTIND).MiSTs are becoming a new promise,even if clinical trials with longer follow-up are still lacking.Most of them are still under investigation and,to date,only a few options have been given as a recommendation for use.They cannot be considered as standard of care and are not suitable for all patients.Advantages and disadvantages should be underlined,without forgetting our objective:treatment of LUTS and re-treatment avoidance.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials implementing aromatase inhibitors to treat male infertility

Aromatase activity has commonly been associated with male infertility characterized by testicular dysfunction with low serum testosterone and/or testosterone to estradiol ratio.In this subset of patients,and particularly in those with hypogonadism,elevated levels of circulating estradiol may establish a negative feedback on the hypothalamic–pituitary–testicular axis by suppressing follicle-stimulating hormone(FSH)and luteinizing hormone(LH)production and impaired spermatogenesis.Hormonal manipulation via different agents such as selective estrogen modulators or aromatase inhibitors to increase endogenous testosterone production and improve spermatogenesis in the setting of infertility is an off-label option for treatment.We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature of the past 30 years in order to evaluate the benefits of the use of aromatase inhibitors in the medical management of infertile/hypoandrogenic males.Overall,eight original articles were included and critically evaluated.Either steroidal(Testolactone)or nonsteroidal(Anastrozole and Letrozole)aromatase inhibitors were found to statistically improve all the evaluated hormonal and seminal outcomes with a safe tolerability profile.While the evidence is promising,future prospective randomized placebo-controlled multicenter trials are necessary to better define the efficacy of these medications.