Palliative urologic surgery for metastatic prostate cancer: what needs to be considered in the future?

Abstract

Androgen deprivation in combination with novel hormonal agents, docetaxel or the combination of abiraterone/prednisone plus docetaxel or darolutamide plus docetaxel represent the standard therapeutic approach in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Patients with low-risk prostate cancer also benefit from additional radiation therapy or radical prostatectomy in terms of progression-free and overall survival. Despite favourable response rates, basically all patients will develop castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) within 2.5 to 4 years. Systemic chemotherapy, second-line hormonal treatment or systemic application of radionuclides such as Radium-223 or 177Lu-PSMA represent salvage management options. As the new medical treatment options have led to an improved oncological outcome with significantly prolonged survival times, about 50% to 65% of patients will develop symptoms due to local progression of prostate cancer. The management of such symptomatic local progression will become more important in upcoming years, which means that all uro-oncologists need to be aware of the various surgical management options. If complications of the lower urogenital tract occur, for example repetitive gross haematuria with or without bladder clotting and with the necessity for red blood cell transfusions, subvesical obstruction, acute urinary retention or rectourethral or rectovesical fistulas, these may be managed by palliative surgery such as palliative TURP, radical cystectomy, radical cystoprostatectomy with urinary diversion, and pelvic exenteration. Symptomatic or asymptomatic obstruction of the upper urinary tract can be managed by endoluminal or percutaneous urinary diversion, ureteral reimplantation, ileal ureter replacement, or implantation of a Detour system. However, an individualised and risk-adapted treatment strategy needs to be developed for each single patient to achieve an optimal therapeutic outcome with improvement of both symptoms and quality of life. In specific clinical situations, best supportive care may be an adequate option.