Search

The aim of our study was to compare the performance of residents vs. consultants in transrectal fusion prostate biopsies (FUS-PBs), as well as patient-reported comfort. Between January 2021 and October 2022, a consecutive series of patients undergoing FUS-PBs were randomized into two groups: (A) FUS-PBs performed by a consultant; (B) FUS-PBs performed by trained residents (>50 procedures). All patients underwent FUS-PBs with 12 systematic cores and 3/6 target cores. The detection rate and number of positive cores in the target lesion were compared between groups, and the patient's discomfort after the procedure was evaluated using the VAS scale. Overall, 140 patients with a median age of 72 years were enrolled. Overall, 69/140 (49.3%) presented prostate cancer and 53/69 (76.8%) presented a clinically significant cancer (Grade Group ≥ 2). Consultants presented a detection rate of 37/70 (52.9%) and residents a detection rate of 32/70 (45.7%) ( p > 0.2); the mean number of positive cores in the index lesion was similar in both groups (1.5 vs. 1.1; p > 0.10). In terms of the patients' experiences, the procedure was well tolerated, with a median VAS score of 2 in both groups, with no statistically significant differences. Residents showed satisfactory outcomes in terms of detection rate, procedural time, and patient comfort when performing prostate biopsies. Residents, after adequate training, can safely perform prostate biopsies.

Background and Aims: The aim of our study is to evaluate the possible urodynamic effect of prostatic urethral lift (PUL) in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Methods: A consecutive series of patients undergoing PUL placement were consecutively enrolled in two centers. Inclusion criteria: ≥50 years of age, benign prostatic obstruction (BPO), international prostate symptom score (IPSS) ≥ 13, prostate volume ≤ 60 mL, and no middle prostate lobe. All patients were evaluated using a detailed clinical history, a validated questionnaire, flexible cystoscopy, and pressure flow studies (PFS) at baseline. PFS were performed at 6 months to evaluate the urodynamic effect of PUL. Results: Overall, 20 patients with a median age of 63 were enrolled. At six months, statistically significant improvements in terms of median Qmax (11.5 vs. 8.5; p < 0.05) and median IPSS (16 vs. 10.5; p < 0.05) were recorded, and sexual function was maintained. All urodynamic parameters improved at 6 months, and significance was reached for all values except for PdetQmax. Finally, Schäfer's class improved from a median of III to a median of II. More specifically, 16/20 presented an improvement in the Schäfer class, and 12/20 patients presented a BOOI < 20 at 6 months. Conclusions: PUL represents an effective treatment in patients with LUTS due to BPH and improves bladder outlet obstruction without any effect on sexual function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to assess the importance of the post-void residual (PVR) ratio (PVR ratio) in achieving a favorable trifecta outcome for patients suffering from lower urinary tract symptoms and benign prostatic enlargement (LUTS-BPE) who undergo transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). Starting from 2015, a series of patients with LUTS-BPE who underwent TURP were included in a forward-looking study. These patients were assessed using the international prostate symptom score (IPSS) screening tool, uroflowmetry, and a transrectal ultrasound to measure prostate volume (TRUS). Both the PVR urine volume and the PVR ratio (PVR-R), which is the PVR as a percentage of total bladder volume (voided volume + PVR), were measured. The assessment of outcomes was based on the trifecta favorable outcome, defined as meeting all of the following criteria: (1) absence of perioperative complications, (2) a postoperative IPSS of less than eight, and (3) a postoperative maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) greater than 15 mL/s. A total of 143 patients were included, with a median age of 70 years (interquartile range 65–73). Of these, 58% (83/143) achieved a positive trifecta outcome. Upon conducting a multivariate analysis, both IPSS and Qmax were identified as predictors of a positive trifecta outcome, whereas the PVR-R did not prove to be an independent predictor. In summary, it was found that preoperative IPSS and Qmax are indicative of a trifecta outcome following TURP, whereas PVR-R is not. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]