IJU case reports · 2021
Mucin-producing urothelial-type adenocarcinoma of the prostate diagnosed after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shimizu Kosuke, Inoue Ryo, Tomochika Shinobu, Isoyama Naohito, Yamamoto Yoshiaki, Matsumoto Hiroaki, Shiraishi Koji, Yoshino Shigefumi, Tsuzuki Toyonori, Matsuyama Hideyasu
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Mucin-producing adenocarcinoma of the prostate is a rare disease that includes prostate adenocarcinoma with mucus production, secondary adenocarcinoma from the bladder or colorectum, and adenocarcinoma from the urothelium of the prostatic urethra. We describe prostate-specific antigen-negative mucin-producing urothelial-type adenocarcinoma of the prostate.
CASE PRESENTATION: The patient had urinary retention and a serum prostate-specific antigen level of 0.74 ng/mL. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging revealed a prostate tumor with a mucous component. We diagnosed adenocarcinoma by prostate biopsy and subsequently performed robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Mucin-producing urothelial-type adenocarcinoma of the prostate was diagnosed by pathological examinations. Lung metastasis, developing within 3 months after surgery, was treated using chemotherapy.
CONCLUSION: Endocrine therapy is ineffective for mucin-producing urothelial-type adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Mucin-producing urothelial-type adenocarcinoma of the prostate diagnosis requires pathological and immunohistochemical analyses. It is important to surgically remove the primary lesion, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy may provide an effective approach. Multimodal therapy is essential to treat for mucin-producing urothelial-type adenocarcinoma of the prostate.
CASE PRESENTATION: The patient had urinary retention and a serum prostate-specific antigen level of 0.74 ng/mL. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging revealed a prostate tumor with a mucous component. We diagnosed adenocarcinoma by prostate biopsy and subsequently performed robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Mucin-producing urothelial-type adenocarcinoma of the prostate was diagnosed by pathological examinations. Lung metastasis, developing within 3 months after surgery, was treated using chemotherapy.
CONCLUSION: Endocrine therapy is ineffective for mucin-producing urothelial-type adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Mucin-producing urothelial-type adenocarcinoma of the prostate diagnosis requires pathological and immunohistochemical analyses. It is important to surgically remove the primary lesion, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy may provide an effective approach. Multimodal therapy is essential to treat for mucin-producing urothelial-type adenocarcinoma of the prostate.