Search

Objectives: To compare the oncological outcomes of patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) undergoing kidney‐sparing surgery (KSS) with fibre‐optic (FO) vs digital (D) ureteroscopy (URS). To evaluate the oncological impact of image‐enhancement technologies such as narrow‐band imaging (NBI) and Image1‐S in patients with UTUC. Patients and Methods: The Clinical Research Office of the Endourology Society (CROES)‐UTUC registry is an international, multicentre, cohort study prospectively collecting data on patients with UTUC. Patients undergoing flexible FO‐ or D‐URS for diagnostic or diagnostic and treatment purposes were included. Differences between groups in terms of overall survival (OS) and disease‐free survival (DFS) were evaluated. Results: The CROES registry included 2380 patients from 101 centres and 37 countries, of whom 401 patients underwent URS (FO‐URS 186 and D‐URS 215). FO‐URS were performed more frequently for diagnostic purposes, while D‐URS was peformed when a combined diagnostic and treatment strategy was planned. Intra‐ and postoperative complications did not differ between the groups. The 5‐year OS and DFS rates were 91.5% and 66.4%, respectively. The mean OS was 42 months for patients receiving FO‐URS and 39 months for those undergoing D‐URS (P = 0.9); the mean DFS was 28 months in the FO‐URS group and 21 months in the D‐URS group (P < 0.001). In patients who received URS with treatment purposes, there were no differences in OS (P = 0.9) and DFS (P = 0.7). NBI and Image1‐S technologies did not improve OS or DFS over D‐URS. Conclusions: D‐URS did not provide any oncological advantage over FO‐URS. Similarly, no differences in terms of OS and DFS were found when image‐enhancement technologies were compared to D‐URS. These findings underline the importance of surgeon skills and experience, and reinforce the need for the centralisation of UTUC care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To assess epidemiologic characteristics, clinical and pathologic patterns of presentation, and treatment strategies in a contemporary population with renal masses (RMs). Methods: The Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society collected prospective epidemiologic, clinical, and pathologic data on consecutive patients with RMs who were treated during a 1-year period in 98 centers worldwide. Preoperative assessment and treatment were performed according to local clinical practice guidelines. Results: From January 2010 to February 2012, 4288 patients (4355 cases, 4815 tumors) were treated for a RM. The mean age of the cohort was 61.5 years, and the ratio male:female 1.8:1. Caucasians represented 75% of the population, and the median body mass index was 27. The cohort exhibited a high rate of comorbidity (65.6%), including a 48.5% rate of hypertension; one-third of patients had a combination of two or more comorbidities. One-third of patients (36%) had risk factors for renal-cell carcinoma (RCC), of which smoking and obesity were the most common. Diagnosis was incidental in 67% of cases, and 22.2% of cases had chronic kidney disease stage ≥III at presentation. Median radiologic size was 44 mm (range 2-300 mm) and 68% were cT1. Radical nephrectomy and nephron-sparing surgery (NSS) including ablation were performed in 52% and 46% of cases, respectively, while 3.6% of cases were actively surveyed. Median pathologic size was 43 mm (range 2-300 mm) and 63% of the RCCs were pT1. Conclusions: Current patterns of presentation of RMs are consistent with the decreasing trends in age and clinical or pathologic size and increasing incidental diagnosis. Patients exhibit a considerable basal comorbidity and presence of risk factors for RCC. Half of the cases are treated by a nephron-sparing modality with an increase in the penetration of NSS techniques in the contemporary urologic practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Purpose: The vast increase in recent publications on renal mass biopsy (RMB) suggests an increased interest in the subject. The objective of the survey was to assess the use of RMB in current urologic practice, including related factors such as indications and patterns in practice. Methods: The link to a web-based questionnaire () was sent to all registered e-mail addresses (1854) of members of the Endourological Society in December 2010. The questionnaire contained six epidemiologic questions, 10 regarding patterns of practice, one regarding the influence of the literature, and one on future techniques. Chi-square test (for trends) was used to assess statistical significant differences among categorical answers. Results: In total, 190 responders completed the survey of whom 73% indicated performing RMB 'never' or 'rarely' compared with 9% performing RMB in 25% to 100% of cases. Thirteen percent of responders reported never to take a RMB. Of the latter, significantly fewer practice in university hospitals (6% vs 20%-30%, P=0.003). Main indications to perform RMB are still tumors in solitary/transplant kidneys and in metastatic disease. Lack of influence on clinical management and risk of false negatives were the main reasons not to perform biopsies. Sixty-one percent prefer histological biopsies compared with 8% who prefer cytological aspiration; 31% indicated that they combine both techniques. Other tissue differentiation techniques (Optical Coherence Tomography, Raman-spectroscopy) are unknown to 65% of urologists. Conclusion: RMB is not yet applied widely in urologic practice, with academic urologists performing RMB less infrequently. Core biopsies are still preferred, although combined with cytologic punctures by a considerable number of responders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Ureteroscopy outcome depends on the availability of the technological equipment and the surgeon experience. This study tries to define the learning curve of ureteroscopy, to underline the current quality of training and to propose the minimum requirements for a curriculum in ureteroscopy. The aim of the present review was to study factors influencing training and the maintenance of skills in performing ureteroscopy (URS). We searched on the following keywords in the Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases: renal or ureteric stone; ureteroscopy; endourology; educational; training; learning curve; expertise; skill; residency; practice; simulator; and robotics. We have defined, when possible, levels and grades of evidence, based on 2009 recommendations of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. We found that technological advancement and surgeon experience is a predictive factor for success or complications of URS. Experience may be related to special endourology training, time passed after basic training and the number of procedures performed. Studies suggest that a resident must perform a certain amount of cases to gain proficiency with URS, but there is still a need for well designed studies for the learning curve of URS to be accurately defined. Training models may be useful for training in URS and stone disintegration. Stone centres that provide all the endoscopic treatment options seem to provide the best conditions to ensure a sufficient volume of patients required. Defining minimum requirements for training in URS and for maintaining certification is a major challenge, as is defining the learning curve in URS. Careful curriculum design in high-volume stone centres may be the key to optimizing URS training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]