Search

PURPOSE: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common oncologic disease among men. Radical treatment with curative intent provides good oncological results for PCa survivors, although definitive therapy is associated with significant number of serious side-effects. In modern-era of medicine tissue-sparing techniques, such as focal HIFU, have been proposed for PCa patients in order to provide cancer control equivalent to the standard-of-care procedures while reducing morbidities and complications. The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the available evidence about focal HIFU therapy as a primary treatment for localized PCa. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature review of focal HIFU therapy in the MEDLINE database (PROSPERO: CRD42021235581). Articles published in the English language between 2010 and 2020 with more than 50 patients were included. RESULTS: Clinically significant in-field recurrence and out-of-field progression were detected to 22% and 29% PCa patients, respectively. Higher ISUP grade group, more positive cores at biopsy and bilateral disease were identified as the main risk factors for disease recurrence. The most common strategy for recurrence management was definitive therapy. Six months after focal HIFU therapy 98% of patients were totally continent and 80% of patients retained sufficient erections for sexual intercourse. The majority of complications presented in the early postoperative period and were classified as low-grade. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights that focal HIFU therapy appears to be a safe procedure, while short-term cancer control rate is encouraging. Though, second-line treatment or active surveillance seems to be necessary in a significant number of patients.

We aimed to perform a systematic review of randomized trials to summarize the evidence on the safety and stone-free rate after Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) (ureteral stent/catheter, no nephrostomy) compared to Standard PCNL (nephrostomy, with/without ureteral stent/catheter) to evaluate if the tubeless approach is better. The inverse variance of the mean difference with a random effect, 95% Confidence Interval (CI), and p values was used for continuous variables. Categorical variables were assessed using Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel method with the random effect model, and reported as Risk Ratio (RR), 95% CI, and p values. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05 and a 95% CI. 26 studies were included. Mean operative time was significantly shorter in the Tubeless group (MD-5.18 min, 95% CI - 6.56, - 3.80, p < 0.00001). Mean postoperative length of stay was also significantly shorter in the Tubeless group (MD-1.10 day, 95% CI - 1.48, - 0.71, p < 0.00001). Incidence of blood transfusion, angioembolization for bleeding control, pain score at the first postoperative day, the number of patients requiring postoperative pain medication, fever, urinary infections, sepsis, perirenal fluid collection, pleural breach, hospital readmission, and SFR did not differ between the two groups. Incidence of postoperative urinary fistula was significantly lower in the Tubeless group (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.07, 0.47, p = 0.0005). This systematic review shows that tubeless PCNL can be safely performed and the standout benefits are shorter operative time and hospital stay, and a lower rate of postoperative urinary fistula. Universita Politecnica delle Marche within the CRUI-CARE Agreement

Sperm vitality testing is a basic semen examination that has been described in the World Health Organization (WHO) Laboratory Manual for the Examination and Processing of Human Semen from its primary edition, 40 years ago. Several methods can be used to test sperm vitality, such as the eosin-nigrosin (E-N) stain or the hypoosmotic swelling (HOS) test. In the 6th (2021) edition of the WHO Laboratory Manual, sperm vitality assessment is mainly recommended if the total motility is less than 40%. Hence, a motile spermatozoon is considered alive, however, in certain conditions an immotile spermatozoon can also be alive. Therefore, the differentiation between asthenozoospermia (pathological decrease in sperm motility) and necrozoospermia (pathological decrease in sperm vitality) is important in directing further investigation and management of infertile patients. The causes leading to necrozoospermia are diverse and can either be local or general, testicular or extra -testicular. The andrological management of necrozoospermia depends on its etiology. However, there is no standardized treatment available presently and practice varies among clinicians. In this study, we report the results of a global survey to understand current practices regarding the physician order of sperm vitality tests as well as the management practices for necrozoospermia. Laboratory and clinical scenarios are presented to guide the reader in the management of necrozoospermia with the overall objective of establishing a benchmark ranging from the diagnosis of necrozoospermia by sperm vitality testing to its clinical management. American Center for Reproductive Medicine

Purpose: Experts recommend us to keep a safety guidewire during the process of upper urinary tract endoscopy, though there is a lack of high-level evidence to support the efficacy and safety of this opinion. This study was conducted to compare the outcome of ureteral stone breakage in the presence or absence of a safety guidewire. Materials and methods: Patients candidate for endoscopic breakage of ureteral stone using a semi-rigid ureteroscope, were randomly assigned in two groups based on keeping a safety guidewire (group1) or removing the guidewire (group2) before the process of breaking ureteral stone by lithoclast. Demographic factors, history of previous stone treatment, kidney function, stone location, symptoms duration and severity were recorded for each patient. Primary outcomes included success rate of stone treatment and secondary outcomes included number of attempts to enter to ureter, success rate of ureteral entry, success rate of stone achievement, stone migration rate and the success rate of ureteral stent insertion. The recorded data were entered to the SPSS software and descriptive statistical analysis including power calculation and non-inferiority design for the primary and secondary outcomes, was performed. P-value less than 0.05 was considered significant. Results: From January 2016 till May 2018, 320 patients were randomized with 160 patients in each arm. Considering the cases who were missed due to follow-up loss, there were 153 patients in group 1 and 147 patients in group 2 at the end of the study. Baseline data were equally distributed in both groups. Based on the initial analysis, the studied variables had no significant difference between two groups; though, according to the subgroup analysis of patients with proximal ureter stones, patients in Group 1 had higher rates of ureteral injury comparing to the patients in Group 2 (p = 0.03). Conclusion: According to our findings, keeping the safety guidewire through the process of endoscopic stone breakage (stone size: less than 1.5Cm) seems to add no significant benefit to the procedure outcome, while it increases the ureteral injuries in the proximal ureter stones, but not in mid or distal ureter stones.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To assess patterns of presentation, diagnostics and treatment in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), a multicentre registry was launched. Clinical data of UTUC patients were prospectively collected over a 5-year period. RECENT FINDINGS: Data from 2380 patients were included from 2014 to 2019 (101 centres in 29 countries). Patients were predominantly male (70.5%) and 53.3% were past or present smokers. The majority of patients (58.1%) were evaluated because of symptoms, mainly macroscopic hematuria. Computed tomography (CT) was the most common performed imaging modality (90.5%). A ureteroscopy (URS) was part of the diagnostic process in 1184 (49.7%) patients and 488 (20.5%) patients were treated endoscopically. In total, 1430 patients (60.1%) were treated by a radical nephroureterectomy, 59% without a prior diagnostic URS. Eighty-two patients (3.4%) underwent a segmental resection, 19 patients (0.8%) were treated by a percutaneous tumour resection. SUMMARY: Our data is in line with the known epidemiologic characteristics of UTUC. CT imaging is the preferred imaging modality as also recommended by guidelines. Diagnostic URS gained a stronger position, however, in almost half of patients a definitive treatment decision was made without complete endoscopic information. Only one-third of patients with UTUC are currently treated with kidney sparing surgery.

Technological advances in minimally invasive treatment of stone disease and its integration with concomitant clinical practice are amongst the most important achievements in urology. Despite the wealth of information accumulated over the years and the richness of existing literature, the knowledge about the definition, treatment and outcomes of residual stone fragments after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) is still insufficient. Due to the high stone load a lot of patients with staghorn stones have residual fragments (RFs) after treatment with PNL, which depends on the size of tract, definition of stone free rate (SFR), timing of evaluation and the imaging used. No consensus exists on the imaging modality or their timing in the evaluation of possible RFs. The treatment of residual stones is apparently different depending on the facilities of the department and the preference of the surgeon, which includes active surveillance, shock wave lithotripsy (SWL), retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) or a second look PNL.

Objectives: To review the current literature on the presence of COVID-19 virus in the urine of infected patients and to explore the clinical features that can predict the presence of COVID-19 in urine.Materials and Methods: A systematic review of published literature between 30th December 2019 and 21st June 2020 was conducted on Pubmed, Google Scholar, Ovid, Scopus, and ISI web of science. Studies investigating urinary viral shedding of COVID-19 in infected patients were included. Two reviewers selected relative studies and performed quality assessment of individual studies. Meta-analysis was performed on the pooled case reports and cohort with a sample size of >= 9.Results: Thirty-nine studies were finally included in the systematic review; 12 case reports, 26 case series, and one cohort study. Urinary samples from 533 patients were investigated. Fourteen studies reported the presence of COVID-19 in the urinary samples from 24 patients. The crude overall rate of COVID-19 detection in urinary samples was 4.5%. Considering case series and cohorts with a sample size of >= 9, the estimated viral shedding frequency was 1.18 % (CI 95%: 0.14 - 2.87) in the meta-analysis. Urinary viral load in most reports were lower than rectal or oropharyngeal samples. In adult patients, urinary shedding of COVID-19 was commonly detected in patients with moderate to severe disease (16 adult patients with moderate or severe disease versus two adult patients with mild disease). In children, urinary viral shedding of COVID-19 was reported in 4 children who all suffered from mild disease. Urinary viral shedding of COVID-19 was detected from day 1 to day 52 after disease onset. The pathogenicity of virus isolated from urine has been demonstrated in cell culture media in one study while another study failed to reveal replication of isolated viral RNA in cell cultures. Urinary symptoms were not attributed to urinary viral shedding.Conclusion: While COVID-19 is rarely detected in urine of infected individuals, infection transmission through urine still remains possible. In adult patients, infected urine is more likely in the presence of moderate or severe disease. Therefore, caution should be exerted when dealing with COVID-19 infected patients during medical interventions like endoscopy and urethral catheterization especially in symptomatic adult patients while in children caution should be exerted regardless of symptoms.

Our aim is to present the current position of mobile health (mHealth) and the delivery of healthcare services via mobile communication devices in urology. We conducted a literature review of urology mHealth papers on PubMed. Results indicate that mHealth is becoming ubiquitous in contemporary healthcare systems. Although its potential has been shown, urology lags behind other areas, representing just 0.1% of the 300,000 available medical apps in the Apple App Store and Google Play Store. Furthermore, there is a lack of expert healthcare professional involvement in app development. To avoid harm, it is critical that the scientific accuracy, patient privacy, and user safety of urology mHealth applications are assured. This is because there is no globally enforced medical app regulation, compulsory scientific guidelines, nor mandatory industry standards. Urologists, either individually or via scientific organizations, should have a pivotal position in the design, development, review, certification, and recommendation of apps. mHealth holds great potential in urology, as it can aid multiple stakeholders: citizens, patients, healthcare professionals, health organizations, and public authorities (e.g., Ministry of Health). Even though it is mostly used to improve existing medical activities at present, the future will include revolutionary and ground-breaking technology solutions. This innovative field should be seen by urologists as an opportunity to provide greater care to our patients and better tools and knowledge to our peers.

Contemporary minimally invasive surgical (MIS) treatment options of patients with male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS) in men with prostate glands >80 mL include Holmium Laser Enucleation Prostate (HoLEP), Thulium laser VapoEnucleation Prostate (ThuVEP), and Laparoscopic (LSP) or Robotic-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy (RASP). Implementing new laser technologies is costly, and the steep learning curve of these laser techniques limit their wide range use. This promoted the use of LSP and RASP in centers with readily established laparoscopy or robotic surgery programs. The aim of this study is to review case and comparative series of RASP. We systematically reviewed published data from 2008 to 2020 on RASP and have identified 26 non-comparative and 9 comparative case series. RASP has longer operation time but less time spent in hospital and less blood loss. The outcomes of improvements in symptom score, post-voiding residual urine (PVR), postoperative PSA decline, complications, and cost are similar when compared to open and laser enucleation techniques. These outcomes position RASP as a viable MIS treatment option for patients with male LUTS needing surgical treatment for enlarged prostates. Nevertheless, prospective, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with multicenter and large sample size are needed to confirm the findings of this systematic review.

Background: Focal therapy for prostate cancer has been proposed as an alternative treatment to whole-gland therapies in selected men to diminish side effects in localized prostate cancer. As nowadays imaging cannot offer complete prostate cancer disease characterization, multicore systematic biopsies are recommended (transrectal or transperineal). Optical imaging techniques such as confocal laser endomicroscopy and optical coherence tomography allow in vivo, high-resolution imaging. Moreover, they can provide real-time visualization and analysis of tissue and have the potential to offer additive diagnostic information. Objective: This study has 2 separate primary objectives. The first is to assess the technical feasibility and safety of in vivo focal imaging with confocal laser endomicroscopy and optical coherence tomography. The second is to identify and define characteristics of prostate cancer and normal prostate tissue in confocal laser endomicroscopy and optical coherence tomography imaging by comparing these images with the corresponding histopathology. Methods: In this prospective, in vivo feasibility study, needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy and optical coherence tomography imaging will be performed before transperineal template mapping biopsy or radical prostatectomy. First, confocal laser endomicroscopy and optical coherence tomography will be performed in 4 patients (2 for each imaging modality) undergoing transperineal template mapping biopsy to assess the feasibility and safety of confocal laser endomicroscopy and optical coherence tomography. If proven to be safe and feasible, confocal laser endomicroscopy and optical coherence tomography will be performed in 10 patients (5 for each imaging modality) undergoing radical prostatectomy. Confocal laser endomicroscopy and optical coherence tomography images will be analyzed by independent, blinded observers. Confocal laser endomicroscopy- and optical coherence tomography-based qualitative and quantitative characteristics and histopathology will be compared. The study complies with the IDEAL (Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long-term study) stage 2a recommendations. Results: At present, the study is enrolling patients and results and outcomes are expected in 2019. Conclusions: Confocal laser endomicroscopy and optical coherence tomography are promising optical imaging techniques that can visualize and analyze tissue structure, possible tumor grade, and architecture in real time. They can potentially provide real-time, high-resolution microscopic imaging and tissue characteristics of prostate cancer in conjunction with magnetic resonance imaging or transrectal ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy procedures. This study will provide insight into the feasibility and tissue-specific characteristics of confocal laser endomicroscopy and optical coherence tomography for real-time optical analysis of prostate cancer.

Purpose of reviewMost of focal therapies has addressed index lesion as the targeted tumour focus to treat localized prostate cancer (PCa), a multifocal disease. The interaction between tumour foci and host cells creates a tumour microenvironment (TME) which affects tumour growth, cellular proliferation, and PCa progression. This review aims to better understand the biology of cancer foci and their interaction with the prostatic microenvironment after focal therapy.Recent findingsIndex lesions are representative of PCa grade in low-risk patients, but the other foci of tumour, the satellite lesions, gain relevance in higher risk patients. Multiparametric MRI, guided biopsies and new biomarkers in combination are important to address PCa multifocality and to adequately select patients to focal therapy. Stromal, immune, and tumoural components are integrated in tumourigenesis and modified after the inflammation induced by focal therapy.SummaryTME and inflammation play an important role in PCa progression, but further researches are necessary to understand how once protective components of prostate microenvironment become protumour elements and how inflammation induced by focal therapy can affect them. Learning how to modulate TME is an exploratory molecular field that can lead us to better manage PCa in both prevention and treatment scenarios.