Pub Date : 2025-08-01DOI: 10.1007/s11934-025-01287-z
Isabel M Koolik, Megan E Bock, Jodi A Antonelli
Purpose of review: This manuscript provides a comprehensive review of the risks of radiation exposure in endourology and highlights strategies to ensure the health and safety of endourologists during pregnancy.
Recent findings: Recent studies have measured radiation exposure to endourologists during fluoroscopic procedures, underscoring the role of protective measures such as lead shielding, low-dose fluoroscopy, and pulsed imaging to significantly reduce radiation doses. Adherence to these strategies enables endourologists to safely perform fluoroscopic procedures throughout pregnancy while staying within recommended exposure limits. This review outlines the latest research on radiation exposure in endourology with a focus on exposure risks during pregnancy. Major findings include insights into potential stochastic and dose-dependent effects of radiation exposure on pregnant endourologists and their fetuses as well as effective dose-reduction strategies to mitigate these risks. Further research is needed to improve individual understanding of exposure risks and establish standardized institutional and policy frameworks for radiation safety during pregnancy.
{"title":"Managing Radiation Exposure to Endourologists during Pregnancy.","authors":"Isabel M Koolik, Megan E Bock, Jodi A Antonelli","doi":"10.1007/s11934-025-01287-z","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11934-025-01287-z","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>This manuscript provides a comprehensive review of the risks of radiation exposure in endourology and highlights strategies to ensure the health and safety of endourologists during pregnancy.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Recent studies have measured radiation exposure to endourologists during fluoroscopic procedures, underscoring the role of protective measures such as lead shielding, low-dose fluoroscopy, and pulsed imaging to significantly reduce radiation doses. Adherence to these strategies enables endourologists to safely perform fluoroscopic procedures throughout pregnancy while staying within recommended exposure limits. This review outlines the latest research on radiation exposure in endourology with a focus on exposure risks during pregnancy. Major findings include insights into potential stochastic and dose-dependent effects of radiation exposure on pregnant endourologists and their fetuses as well as effective dose-reduction strategies to mitigate these risks. Further research is needed to improve individual understanding of exposure risks and establish standardized institutional and policy frameworks for radiation safety during pregnancy.</p>","PeriodicalId":11112,"journal":{"name":"Current Urology Reports","volume":"26 1","pages":"59"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144759394","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-24DOI: 10.1007/s11934-025-01286-0
Hailey Travis, Avi Sura, Nikolas Moring, Brian M Inouye
Purpose of review: This narrative review summarizes the evolution of the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) and its role in treating male stress urinary incontinence (SUI). This review discusses the history of AUS and changes that have helped drive current and future developments in AUS innovation.
Recent findings: Recent AUS models have addressed many shortcomings of prior devices designed for the treatment of SUI. However, the need for manual pumping as well as the risks of erosion, infection, and malfunction remain areas of concern, prompting innovative transformations to AUS development. The AUS is the gold standard and most effective treatment for male SUI. Currently available devices have limitations, especially in patients with reduced manual dexterity and cognition. Additionally, there are inherent risks for urethral erosion and device failure. Despite the efficacy and success of modern-day AUS devices, there is still opportunity for innovation in the AUS market. This includes the advent of electronic assisted devices as well as adjustable and variable pressure mechanisms to create dynamic artificial sphincters that minimize complications while maximizing patient outcomes.
{"title":"A Comprehensive Review of Artificial Urinary Sphincters: History, Current Utilization, and Future Innovations.","authors":"Hailey Travis, Avi Sura, Nikolas Moring, Brian M Inouye","doi":"10.1007/s11934-025-01286-0","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11934-025-01286-0","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>This narrative review summarizes the evolution of the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) and its role in treating male stress urinary incontinence (SUI). This review discusses the history of AUS and changes that have helped drive current and future developments in AUS innovation.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Recent AUS models have addressed many shortcomings of prior devices designed for the treatment of SUI. However, the need for manual pumping as well as the risks of erosion, infection, and malfunction remain areas of concern, prompting innovative transformations to AUS development. The AUS is the gold standard and most effective treatment for male SUI. Currently available devices have limitations, especially in patients with reduced manual dexterity and cognition. Additionally, there are inherent risks for urethral erosion and device failure. Despite the efficacy and success of modern-day AUS devices, there is still opportunity for innovation in the AUS market. This includes the advent of electronic assisted devices as well as adjustable and variable pressure mechanisms to create dynamic artificial sphincters that minimize complications while maximizing patient outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":11112,"journal":{"name":"Current Urology Reports","volume":"26 1","pages":"58"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144697769","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-11DOI: 10.1007/s11934-025-01283-3
Vivian L Wang, Lucille G Cheng, Toby S Zhu, Shyam Patnaik, Tatum Tarin
Purpose of review: To provide a primer for how augmented reality (AR)-guided surgical technology works at a fundamental level and discuss recent advances and limitations in a rapidly advancing field, including studies aiming to reduce current issues limiting wider adoption.
Recent findings: Among the studies published within the last five years, AR-guided technologies have advanced from pre-operative planning to intraoperative use in procedures including robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and renal transplantation. Artificial intelligence (AI) and deep learning techniques have allowed for development of automatic registration to address challenges with soft tissue deformation. Subspecialities which may benefit from further AR/MR adoption include reconstructive and andrology, which were underrepresented in our review. Augmented reality refers to the process of superimposing digital information (e.g., preoperative imaging) on top of the physical world. Along with its interactive counterpart, mixed reality (MR), AR has become an area of sustained research interest in the urological surgery space. This technology has significant implications for surgical accuracy, efficiency, and medical education. As a result, it is critical for clinicians to both be aware of advancements in the field and understand the basics of this technology. We discuss articles published from March 2021 to February 2025, across a range of urologic procedures and applications, and discuss how recent trends point to a shift towards higher-powered, prospective studies incorporating intraoperative usage of AR/MR.
{"title":"Current Applications and Limitations of Augmented Reality in Urological Surgery: A Practical Primer and 'State of the Field'.","authors":"Vivian L Wang, Lucille G Cheng, Toby S Zhu, Shyam Patnaik, Tatum Tarin","doi":"10.1007/s11934-025-01283-3","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11934-025-01283-3","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>To provide a primer for how augmented reality (AR)-guided surgical technology works at a fundamental level and discuss recent advances and limitations in a rapidly advancing field, including studies aiming to reduce current issues limiting wider adoption.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Among the studies published within the last five years, AR-guided technologies have advanced from pre-operative planning to intraoperative use in procedures including robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and renal transplantation. Artificial intelligence (AI) and deep learning techniques have allowed for development of automatic registration to address challenges with soft tissue deformation. Subspecialities which may benefit from further AR/MR adoption include reconstructive and andrology, which were underrepresented in our review. Augmented reality refers to the process of superimposing digital information (e.g., preoperative imaging) on top of the physical world. Along with its interactive counterpart, mixed reality (MR), AR has become an area of sustained research interest in the urological surgery space. This technology has significant implications for surgical accuracy, efficiency, and medical education. As a result, it is critical for clinicians to both be aware of advancements in the field and understand the basics of this technology. We discuss articles published from March 2021 to February 2025, across a range of urologic procedures and applications, and discuss how recent trends point to a shift towards higher-powered, prospective studies incorporating intraoperative usage of AR/MR.</p>","PeriodicalId":11112,"journal":{"name":"Current Urology Reports","volume":"26 1","pages":"56"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144607722","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-06-30DOI: 10.1007/s11934-025-01281-5
Isela N Oceguera, Omar Thaher, Dirk Bausch, Sjaak Pouwels
Purpose of review: Every surgical procedure presents challenges for surgeons before, during, and after the operation. This review aims to explore strategies for anticipating and addressing these challenges in kidney transplant surgeries.
Recent findings: Specifically, it focuses on equipping surgeons with the knowledge necessary to navigate vascular anatomical variations encountered during kidney retrieval and transplantation. By elucidating both typical and uncommon anatomical configurations, surgeons can better anticipate challenges and optimize surgical outcomes. The review underscores the critical importance of understanding kidney vascular anatomical variations in the context of transplantation. By providing insights into preoperative planning and mitigating intraoperative challenges, this knowledge has the potential to significantly improve outcomes for patients undergoing kidney transplantation.
{"title":"Vascular and Anatomical Challenges in Renal Transplant Surgery; What a Urologist Needs to know.","authors":"Isela N Oceguera, Omar Thaher, Dirk Bausch, Sjaak Pouwels","doi":"10.1007/s11934-025-01281-5","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11934-025-01281-5","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Every surgical procedure presents challenges for surgeons before, during, and after the operation. This review aims to explore strategies for anticipating and addressing these challenges in kidney transplant surgeries.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Specifically, it focuses on equipping surgeons with the knowledge necessary to navigate vascular anatomical variations encountered during kidney retrieval and transplantation. By elucidating both typical and uncommon anatomical configurations, surgeons can better anticipate challenges and optimize surgical outcomes. The review underscores the critical importance of understanding kidney vascular anatomical variations in the context of transplantation. By providing insights into preoperative planning and mitigating intraoperative challenges, this knowledge has the potential to significantly improve outcomes for patients undergoing kidney transplantation.</p>","PeriodicalId":11112,"journal":{"name":"Current Urology Reports","volume":"26 1","pages":"55"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144526796","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-06-30DOI: 10.1007/s11934-025-01284-2
Patrick Juliebø-Jones, Christian Beisland
Purpose of review: The purpose was to present latest findings on factors that can help improve risk profiling for surgery in the elderly and thus improve outcomes.
Recent findings: Approximately two thirds of patients undergoing urological surgery are elderly. A number of assessment tools are now available for clinical application to facilitate risk planning when considering surgery. There is an overall lack of trials performed in the elderly on account of a number of factors including cognitive impairment, mobility and perceived lack of benefit. Clinicians are generally poor at estimating 10-year survival in patients and usually underestimate it. Treatment success in this demographic varies from the index patient and an individualised approach should be taken. It is of increasing relevance for clinicians to familiarize themselves with tools that can facilitate surgical care in the elderly. Prospective studies are needed, which also monitor outcomes in patients who did not undergo surgery.
{"title":"Improving Outcomes in Urological Surgery for the Elderly: Strategies for Optimization and Risk Reduction.","authors":"Patrick Juliebø-Jones, Christian Beisland","doi":"10.1007/s11934-025-01284-2","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11934-025-01284-2","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>The purpose was to present latest findings on factors that can help improve risk profiling for surgery in the elderly and thus improve outcomes.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Approximately two thirds of patients undergoing urological surgery are elderly. A number of assessment tools are now available for clinical application to facilitate risk planning when considering surgery. There is an overall lack of trials performed in the elderly on account of a number of factors including cognitive impairment, mobility and perceived lack of benefit. Clinicians are generally poor at estimating 10-year survival in patients and usually underestimate it. Treatment success in this demographic varies from the index patient and an individualised approach should be taken. It is of increasing relevance for clinicians to familiarize themselves with tools that can facilitate surgical care in the elderly. Prospective studies are needed, which also monitor outcomes in patients who did not undergo surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":11112,"journal":{"name":"Current Urology Reports","volume":"26 1","pages":"54"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12209000/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144526795","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Purpose of review: Robotic assisted partial nephrectomy (RaPN) is the treatment of choice for small and resectable renal tumors offering better results in terms of blood loss, postoperative complications and length of hospital stay compared with the open partial nephrectomy (OPN), while for both techniques the risk of postoperative renal dysfunction is limited. However, the oncologic outcomes of the robotic procedure are yet to be determined. Therefore, a comprehensive research of PubMed/Medline, Embase and Scopus databases from the year 2000 till June 2024 was performed to elucidate the results related to oncologic outcomes. The ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized cohort studies was applied for the assessment of the quality of the included studies. All statistical analyses were performed with the use of STATA software version 15.0.
Recent findings: The study was registered in International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Metaanalysis Protocols database with the registration number INPLASY202450054. Overall 11 studies with 4758 patients were included in the present systematic review and meta-analysis. No statistically significant difference between the two treatment methods was reconded for the outcomes of overall survival [HR: 1.23 (95% CI: 0.68, 2.20)- p = 0.488], disease-specific survival [OR: 2.53 (95% CI: 0.65, 9.78)- p = 0.179], progression-free survival [HR: 1.04 (95% CI: 0.60, 1.79)- p = 0.901], recurrence-free survival [HR: 0.83 (95% CI = 0.54, 1.27)-p = 0.394] and disease-free survival [OR: 1.01 (95% CI = 0.98, 1.03)-p = 0.582]. The quality of most of the included studies was deemed moderate. Despite the need for more high quality comparative studies it is assumed that these results could be helpful in decision making and in counselling patients with resectable renal tumors to whom a nephron sparing surgery may be considered.
综述目的:机器人辅助肾部分切除术(RaPN)是小且可切除的肾肿瘤的首选治疗方法,与开放式肾部分切除术(OPN)相比,在出血量、术后并发症和住院时间方面具有更好的效果,而这两种技术的术后肾功能障碍风险有限。然而,机器人手术的肿瘤学结果还有待确定。因此,我们对2000年至2024年6月的PubMed/Medline、Embase和Scopus数据库进行了综合研究,以阐明与肿瘤预后相关的结果。采用非随机队列研究的ROBINS-I工具评估纳入研究的质量。所有统计分析均使用STATA 15.0版软件进行。该研究已在国际注册系统评价和荟萃分析协议平台数据库中注册,注册号为INPLASY202450054。本系统综述和荟萃分析共纳入了11项研究,共4758例患者。两种治疗方法的总生存期[HR: 1.23 (95% CI: 0.68, 2.20)- p = 0.488]、疾病特异性生存期[OR: 2.53 (95% CI: 0.65, 9.78)- p = 0.179]、无进展生存期[HR: 1.04 (95% CI: 0.60, 1.79)- p = 0.901]、无复发生存期[HR: 0.83 (95% CI = 0.54, 1.27)-p = 0.394]和无疾病生存期[OR: 1.01 (95% CI = 0.98, 1.03)-p = 0.582]无统计学差异。大多数纳入研究的质量被认为是中等的。尽管需要更多高质量的比较研究,但假设这些结果可能有助于决策和咨询可切除肾肿瘤患者,他们可能会考虑保留肾元手术。
{"title":"Comparison of Robot-Assisted Versus Open Partial Nephrectomy for Treating Renal Malignancies With An Emphasis on Oncological Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of The Literature.","authors":"Diomidis Kozyrakis, Chara Tzavara, Christos Damaskos, Anastasios Zarkadas, Dimitrios Bozios, Athanasios Karmogiannis, Vasileios Konstantinopoulos, Georgios Haronis, Anna-Maria Konomi, Georgios Kallinikas, Konstantinos Safioleas, Athanasios Filios, Despoina Mytiliniou, Evangelos Rodinos, Panagiotis Filios, Dimitrios Dimitroulis","doi":"10.1007/s11934-025-01282-4","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11934-025-01282-4","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Robotic assisted partial nephrectomy (RaPN) is the treatment of choice for small and resectable renal tumors offering better results in terms of blood loss, postoperative complications and length of hospital stay compared with the open partial nephrectomy (OPN), while for both techniques the risk of postoperative renal dysfunction is limited. However, the oncologic outcomes of the robotic procedure are yet to be determined. Therefore, a comprehensive research of PubMed/Medline, Embase and Scopus databases from the year 2000 till June 2024 was performed to elucidate the results related to oncologic outcomes. The ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized cohort studies was applied for the assessment of the quality of the included studies. All statistical analyses were performed with the use of STATA software version 15.0.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The study was registered in International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Metaanalysis Protocols database with the registration number INPLASY202450054. Overall 11 studies with 4758 patients were included in the present systematic review and meta-analysis. No statistically significant difference between the two treatment methods was reconded for the outcomes of overall survival [HR: 1.23 (95% CI: 0.68, 2.20)- p = 0.488], disease-specific survival [OR: 2.53 (95% CI: 0.65, 9.78)- p = 0.179], progression-free survival [HR: 1.04 (95% CI: 0.60, 1.79)- p = 0.901], recurrence-free survival [HR: 0.83 (95% CI = 0.54, 1.27)-p = 0.394] and disease-free survival [OR: 1.01 (95% CI = 0.98, 1.03)-p = 0.582]. The quality of most of the included studies was deemed moderate. Despite the need for more high quality comparative studies it is assumed that these results could be helpful in decision making and in counselling patients with resectable renal tumors to whom a nephron sparing surgery may be considered.</p>","PeriodicalId":11112,"journal":{"name":"Current Urology Reports","volume":"26 1","pages":"53"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144474217","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-06-23DOI: 10.1007/s11934-025-01280-6
Keianna Vogel, Nissrine Nakib
Purpose of review: Neurogenic bladder dysfunction (NBD) is a frequent complication of neurological diseases including Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury, and spina bifida. Managing NBD remains challenging, especially for patients who fail to respond to standard therapies. Sacral neuromodulation (SNM), though FDA-approved for non-neurogenic conditions, is increasingly explored off-label in neurogenic populations.
Recent findings: Recent studies demonstrate that SNM can improve lower urinary tract symptoms, bladder storage, and emptying in select NBD patients. Small case series and retrospective reviews suggest reduced catheterization and medication use. Technological advances, such as closed-loop systems and MRI-compatible devices, are broadening SNM's clinical potential. SNM is emerging as a valuable, minimally invasive treatment for neurogenic bladder dysfunction. Careful patient selection and understanding of underlying pathophysiology are essential for success. As evidence grows and device innovations continue, SNM could reshape management strategies for patients with neurogenic bladder.
{"title":"Off-Label but On-Target: Sacral Neuromodulation for Neurogenic Bladder Dysfunction.","authors":"Keianna Vogel, Nissrine Nakib","doi":"10.1007/s11934-025-01280-6","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11934-025-01280-6","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Neurogenic bladder dysfunction (NBD) is a frequent complication of neurological diseases including Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury, and spina bifida. Managing NBD remains challenging, especially for patients who fail to respond to standard therapies. Sacral neuromodulation (SNM), though FDA-approved for non-neurogenic conditions, is increasingly explored off-label in neurogenic populations.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Recent studies demonstrate that SNM can improve lower urinary tract symptoms, bladder storage, and emptying in select NBD patients. Small case series and retrospective reviews suggest reduced catheterization and medication use. Technological advances, such as closed-loop systems and MRI-compatible devices, are broadening SNM's clinical potential. SNM is emerging as a valuable, minimally invasive treatment for neurogenic bladder dysfunction. Careful patient selection and understanding of underlying pathophysiology are essential for success. As evidence grows and device innovations continue, SNM could reshape management strategies for patients with neurogenic bladder.</p>","PeriodicalId":11112,"journal":{"name":"Current Urology Reports","volume":"26 1","pages":"52"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12185588/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144474218","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-06-21DOI: 10.1007/s11934-025-01278-0
Shelby Harper, Erick M Remer, Nima Almassi
Purpose of review: Urothelial carcinoma is a prevalent malignancy within the United States that may involve the upper and/or lower urinary tracts. Multimodal treatment is often employed, with transurethral resection and intravesical therapy standard of care for non-muscle-invasive disease; neoadjuvant systemic therapy followed by radical cystectomy or trimodal therapy for muscle-invasive disease; and combination immune checkpoint inhibitors and antibody-drug conjugates standard of care for metastatic disease. These treatments carry risks of surgical complication or treatment-associated toxicity which can impair quality of life. Predictive biomarkers of treatment tolerability are currently limited.
Recent findings: There is emerging evidence that radiological biomarkers can predict treatment outcomes among patients with urothelial carcinoma. In this review, we evaluate the existing data on radiological biomarkers evaluable from current standard-of-care imaging in predicting treatment outcome among patients with urothelial carcinoma.
{"title":"Re-appraisal of Standard of Care Imaging to Identify Predictors of Treatment Outcomes among Patients with Bladder and Upper Tract Urothelial Cancers.","authors":"Shelby Harper, Erick M Remer, Nima Almassi","doi":"10.1007/s11934-025-01278-0","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11934-025-01278-0","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Urothelial carcinoma is a prevalent malignancy within the United States that may involve the upper and/or lower urinary tracts. Multimodal treatment is often employed, with transurethral resection and intravesical therapy standard of care for non-muscle-invasive disease; neoadjuvant systemic therapy followed by radical cystectomy or trimodal therapy for muscle-invasive disease; and combination immune checkpoint inhibitors and antibody-drug conjugates standard of care for metastatic disease. These treatments carry risks of surgical complication or treatment-associated toxicity which can impair quality of life. Predictive biomarkers of treatment tolerability are currently limited.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>There is emerging evidence that radiological biomarkers can predict treatment outcomes among patients with urothelial carcinoma. In this review, we evaluate the existing data on radiological biomarkers evaluable from current standard-of-care imaging in predicting treatment outcome among patients with urothelial carcinoma.</p>","PeriodicalId":11112,"journal":{"name":"Current Urology Reports","volume":"26 1","pages":"51"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12182448/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144339929","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-06-21DOI: 10.1007/s11934-025-01272-6
Steven P Troy, Christopher D Jakubowski, Benjamin A Gartrell
{"title":"Packing the Punch: Current and Emerging Treatment Strategies in Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer.","authors":"Steven P Troy, Christopher D Jakubowski, Benjamin A Gartrell","doi":"10.1007/s11934-025-01272-6","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11934-025-01272-6","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11112,"journal":{"name":"Current Urology Reports","volume":"26 1","pages":"50"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12182509/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144339928","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}