Search

Abstract Introduction Robotic ureteral reconstruction (RUR) has been widely used to treat ureteral diseases. To summarize the surgical techniques, complications, and outcomes following RUR, as well as to compare data on RUR with open and laparoscopic ureteral reconstruction. Methods Our systematic review was registered on the PROSPERO (CRD42022309364) database. The PubMed, Cochrane and Embase databases were searched for publications in English on 06-Feb-2022. Randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) or non-randomised cohort studies with sample size ≥ 10 cases were included. Results A total of 23 studies were included involving 996 patients and 1004 ureters from 13 non-comparative, and 10 retrospective comparative studies. No RCT study of RUR was reported. The success rate was reported ≥ 90% in 15 studies. Four studies reported 85–90% success rate. Meta-analyses for comparative studies showed that RUR had significantly lower estimated blood loss (EBL) (P = 0.006) and shorter length of stay (LOS) (P

The use of robot-assisted technology has been widely adopted in urological oncological surgery and its benefits have been well established. In recent years, robotic technology has also been used in several functional reconstructive and neuro-urology (FRNU) procedures. The aim of this review was to evaluate the current evidence in the use of robotic technology in the field of FRNU. We performed a PubMed-based literature search between July and August 2022. The keywords we included were ‘robotic assisted’, ‘ureteric reimplantation’, ‘cystoplasty’, ‘ileal conduit’, ‘neobladder’, ‘sacrocolpopexy’, ‘colposuspension’, ‘artificial urinary sphincter’, ‘genitourinary fistula’ and ‘posterior urethral stenoses’. We identified the latest available evidence in the use of robotic technology in specific FRNU procedures such as the reconstruction of the ureters, bladder and urinary sphincter, urinary diversion, and repair of genitourinary prolapse and fistula. We found that there is a lack of prospective studies to assess the robotic-assisted approach in the field of FRNU. Despite this, the advantages that robotic technology can bring to the field of FRNU are evident, including better ergonomics and visual field, less blood loss and shorter hospital stays. There is therefore a need for further prospective studies with larger patient numbers and longer follow-up periods to establish the reproducibility of these results and the long-term efficacy of the procedures, as well as the impact on patient outcomes. Common index procedures and a standardized approach to these procedures should be identified to enhance training.

Background: Urinary fistula (UF) is a global health problem but less common in well-resourced countries. Over the past decade there has been a trend toward managing UF in dedicated centres. Most of the evidence for surgical treatment is from individual case series, with few publications that involve high numbers. We describe the repair of recurrent and complex UF cases and outcomes in a tertiary referral setting. Objective: To describe UF aetiology, repair techniques, and outcomes. Design, setting, and participants: This is a retrospective study of a series of patients undergoing UF repair at a specialist unit. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: We describe the aetiology, cure rate, complications, and postoperative urinary incontinence rates for the series of UF cases. Results and limitations: A consecutive series of 98 patients was identified, all of whom were tertiary referrals. Of these, 31 (31.6%) had at least one prior attempt at repair at another centre. The median age was 48 yr (interquartile range [IQR] 40–60.25). The median time from occurrence to repair was 12 mo (IQR 6–12). UF occurred most commonly following hysterectomy (48.0%), Caesarean section (9.2%), other gynaecological surgery (7.1%), and anti-incontinence surgery (7.1%). Complex fistulae (eg, repeat cases, radiation, ureteric involvement) comprised 41 of the cases (41.8%). Most patients with vesicovaginal fistula underwent repair via a transabdominal approach (70.4%). Tissue interposition was used in 96 cases (98%). There were no Clavien-Dindo grade >3 complications. Two patients (2%) had a persistent UF postoperatively. Two patients (2%) developed recurrence more than 2 yr after their initial repair, and both were successfully repaired at our centre. Twelve patients (12.3%) developed de novo overactive bladder, 22 (22.5%) developed stress urinary incontinence (13 had subsequent incontinence surgery), and two (2%) developed bladder pain (both had a subsequent cystectomy). Conclusions: Despite a high rate of recurrent and complex UF, successful lasting closure was achieved in 96% of our cases. A minority of patients developed other problems such as de novo overactive bladder and stress urinary incontinence that may require further treatment. Patient summary: Urinary fistula is an abnormal opening or connection in the urinary tract and is less common in well-resourced countries. As a consequence, management of this condition is more frequently undertaken at specialist units. Even patients with a complex fistula and those who have had multiple attempts at repair can experience a cure. Urinary leakage is a common complication after the operation but can be successfully managed with surgery.

Underactive bladder (UAB) is a voiding disorder which generates disabling lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to the inability to produce an effective voiding contraction sufficient to empty the bladder. The underlying abnormality, that is usually appreciated when performing urodynamic studies, has been defined by the International Continence Society (ICS) as detrusor underactivity (DUA). DUA is a common yet under-researched bladder dysfunction. The prevalence of DUA in different patient groups suggests that multiple aetiologies are implicated. Currently there is no effective therapeutic approach to treat this condition. An improved understanding of the underlying mechanisms is needed to facilitate the development of new advances in treatment. The purpose of this review is to discuss the epidemiology, pathophysiology, common causes and risk factors potentially leading to DUA; to aid in the appropriate diagnosis of DUA to potentially improve treatment outcomes.

Nocturia is a prevalent and highly bothersome lower urinary tract symptom (LUTS) affecting men and women of all ages. In waking to void there is disruption to an individual’s sleep that can lead to daytime tiredness and a loss of vitality. This may significantly impact upon physical, mental, and social wellbeing. It is recognised that nocturia has a multifactorial aetiopathogenesis that encompasses systemic, psychogenic, as well as lower urinary tract factors, necessitating separate evaluation to other LUTS. In particular, nocturnal polyuria is an under-recognised cause of nocturia that may respond well to antidiuretic pharmacotherapy.

The assessment of men with bladder outflow obstruction relies on an adequate history and examination. Uroflowmetry and post-void residue estimation are very revealing and may be sufficient in the majority of men. The prostate-specific antigen test may be used to select men who are at a high risk of progression. In specific situations, cystometry may be required. We discuss the use of cystometry and the newer less-invasive methods of assessment that have emerged over the last few years, including ultrasound estimation of intravesical prostatic protrusion, prostatic urethra angle, detrusor wall thickness, ultrasound-estimated bladder weight, near-infrared spectroscopy and the condom catheter and penile cuff tests. Although these techniques show promise, they still require further modifications, standardization and testing in larger populations. In addition, they should be used in men where only specific questions need to be answered.

Objectives: To review the use of non-hormonal pharmacotherapies in the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to presumed benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Materials and Methods: A search of the PUBMED database was conducted for the terms BPH, LUTS, bladder outlet obstruction, alpha-adrenoceptor blockers, anti-muscarinics, and phosphodiesterase-5-inhibitors. Results: Medical therapy has long been established as the accepted standard of care in the treatment of male LUTS. The aim of treatment is improvement in symptoms and quality of life whilst minimizing adverse effects. The agents most widely used as 1 st line therapy are alpha-blockers (AB), as a standalone or in combination with 2 other classes of drug; 5-α reductase inhibitors and anti-muscarinics. AB have rapid efficacy, improving symptoms and flow rate in a matter of days, these effects are then maintained over time. AB do not impact on prostate size and do not prevent acute urinary retention or the need for surgery. Anti-mucarinics, alone or in combination with an AB are safe and efficacious in the treatment of bothersome storage symptoms associated with LUTS/BPH. Phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors are an emerging treatment option that improve LUTS without improving flow rates. Conclusions: AB are the most well-established pharmacotherapy in the management of men with LUTS/BPH. The emergence of different classes of agent offers the opportunity to target underlying pathophysiologies driving symptoms and better individualize treatment.