GPGuillaume Ploussard

Guillaume Ploussard

*This is an algorithmically generated author record based on publicly available information.

Guillaume Ploussard has a total of 25 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:


Latest Publications

  • Open Access

    Nerve-Sparing in High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Advantages and Pitfalls of Current Strategies and Technologies

    by Daniele Robesti, Pierluigi Russo, Giuseppe Fallara, Fernando Blank, Massimo Valerio, Ashutosh K. Tewari, Francesco Montorsi, Guillaume Ploussard, Nilesh Patil, Alberto Martini

    Background and Objective: Positive surgical margins (PSMs) remain a major challenge during radical prostatectomy, particularly in patients with high-risk prostate cancer (HR-PCa), where extracapsular extension, multifocal disease, and aggressive tumor biology substantially increase the likelihood of incomplete resection. In this setting, PSMs are strongly associated with early biochemical recurrence and frequently prompt adjuvant or salvage treatments, potentially exposing patients to overtreatment and added morbidity. Materials and Methods: To review and critically appraise established and emerging intraoperative technologies for surgical margin assessment during radical prostatectomy, with a specific focus on their potential role and relevance in patients with HR-PCa. Evidence Acquisition: A non-systematic literature review was performed using Pubmed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, focusing on preoperative, intraoperative ex vivo, and intraoperative in vivo technologies for margin assessment. Emphasis was placed on techniques with potential applicability to HR-PCa, where real-time intraoperative decision-making is particularly consequential. Evidence Synthesis: Preoperative tools, including multiparametric MRI, PSMA-PET imaging, and predictive nomograms, aid surgical planning but show limited sensitivity for microscopic extracapsular extension, especially in high-risk disease. Intraoperative frozen section analysis reduces positive surgical margin rates while enabling selective nerve-sparing (defined as a side-specific, risk-adapted preservation strategy); however, its widespread adoption is constrained by substantial logistical and resource requirements, and robust oncological outcome data in high-risk populations remain limited. Novel ex vivo approaches, such as fluorescence confocal microscopy and specimen-based PSMA PET/CT imaging, offer rapid whole-gland or targeted margin assessment with reduced dependency on dedicated pathology workflows. In parallel, emerging in vivo technologies, particularly PSMA-targeted near-infrared-fluorescence-guided surgery, enable real-time detection of residual tumor and facilitate selective re-resection, representing a biology-driven approach that may be especially suited to HR-PCa. Conclusions: In high-risk prostate cancer, intraoperative margin assessment technologies may extend beyond functional preservation and play a central role in optimizing oncological radicality and multimodal treatment sequencing. While NeuroSAFE remains the reference standard, PSMA-based ex vivo and in vivo technologies are particularly promising in HR-PCa due to their ability to integrate tumor biology into surgical decision-making. Prospective studies focusing on high-risk-specific oncological and patient-reported outcomes are needed before widespread clinical implementation.

  • Open Access

    Online Crowdfunding for Urologic Cancer Care

    by Pawel Rajwa, Philip Hopen, Jakub Wojnarowicz, Julia Kaletka, Iga Paszkiewicz, Olga Lach-Wojnarowicz, Hadi Mostafaei, Wojciech Krajewski, David D’andrea, Bartosz Małkiewicz, et al.

    Background: we aimed to characterize the financial needs expressed through online crowdfunding for urologic cancers. Methods: the data used in this study came from the online crowdfunding platform GoFundMe.com. Using an automated software method, we extracted data for campaigns related to urologic cancers. Subsequently, four independent investigators reviewed all extracted data on prostate, bladder, kidney and testicular cancer. We analyzed campaigns’ basic characteristics, goals, fundraising, type of treatment and factors associated with successful campaigns. Results: in total, we identified 2126 individual campaigns, which were related to direct treatment costs (34%), living expenses (17%) or both (48%). Median fundraising amounts were greatest for testicular cancer. Campaigns for both complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) (median $11,000) or CAM alone (median $8527) achieved higher fundraising totals compared with those for conventional treatments alone (median $5362) (p < 0.01). The number of social media shares was independently associated with campaign success and highest quartile of fundraising. Conclusions: using an automated web-based approach, we identified and characterized online crowdfunding for urologic cancer care. These findings indicated a diverse range of patient needs related to urologic care and factors related to campaigns’ success.