Search

ObjectiveTo compare the performance of 3 contemporary ureteroscopic biopsy devices for the histopathologic diagnosis of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC).MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 145 patients who underwent 182 urothelial biopsies using 2.4F backloaded cup biopsy forceps, a nitinol basket, or 3F standard cup biopsy forceps at 3 tertiary academic centers between 2011 and 2016. Experienced genitourinary pathologists provided an assessment of each specimen without knowledge of the device used for biopsy. For patients who underwent nephroureterectomy without neoadjuvant chemotherapy within 3 months of biopsy-proven UTUC diagnosis, the biopsy grade was compared with both the grade and stage of the surgical specimen.ResultsBiopsy utilization varied among the 3 institutions (P .05) and was favored over standard cup forceps specimens. Grade concordance was not affected by specimen size (P >.05), morphology (P >.1), or location (P >.5). No difference existed among the devices in the rate of acquiring a grade concordant biopsy; however, the backloaded cup forceps provided concordant biopsies that could be distinguished as low- and high-grade (P = .02).ConclusionThe backloaded cup forceps and nitinol basket obtained a higher quality urothelial specimen compared with standard cup forceps. Ureteroscopic biopsy device selection did not significantly impact the accuracy of the histologic diagnosis of UTUC.

BackgroundThe integration of high technology into health care systems is intended to provide new treatment options and improve the quality, safety, and efficiency of care. Robotic-assisted surgery is an example of high technology integration in health care, which has become ubiquitous in many surgical disciplines. ObjectiveThis study aims to understand and measure current robotic-assisted surgery processes in a systematic, quantitative, and replicable manner to identify latent systemic threats and opportunities for improvement based on our observations and to implement and evaluate interventions. This 5-year study will follow a human factors engineering approach to improve the safety and efficiency of robotic-assisted surgery across 4 US hospitals. MethodsThe study uses a stepped wedge crossover design with 3 interventions, introduced in different sequences at each of the hospitals over four 8-month phases. Robotic-assisted surgery procedures will be observed in the following specialties: urogynecology, gynecology, urology, bariatrics, general, and colorectal. We will use the data collected from observations, surveys, and interviews to inform interventions focused on teamwork, task design, and workplace design. We intend to evaluate attitudes toward each intervention, safety culture, subjective workload for each case, effectiveness of each intervention (including through direct observation of a sample of surgeries in each observational phase), operating room duration, length of stay, and patient safety incident reports. Analytic methods will include statistical data analysis, point process analysis, and thematic content analysis. ResultsThe study was funded in September 2018 and approved by the institutional review board of each institution in May and June of 2019 (CSMC and MDRH: Pro00056245; VCMC: STUDY 270; MUSC: Pro00088741). After refining the 3 interventions in phase 1, data collection for phase 2 (baseline data) began in November 2019 and was scheduled to continue through June 2020. However, data collection was suspended in March 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We collected a total of 65 observations across the 4 sites before the pandemic. Data collection for phase 2 was resumed in October 2020 at 2 of the 4 sites. ConclusionsThis will be the largest direct observational study of surgery ever conducted with data collected on 680 robotic surgery procedures at 4 different institutions. The proposed interventions will be evaluated using individual-level (workload and attitude), process-level (perioperative duration and flow disruption), and organizational-level (safety culture and complications) measures. An implementation science framework is also used to investigate the causes of success or failure of each intervention at each site and understand the potential spread of the interventions. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)DERR1-10.2196/25284

Renal masses are increasingly detected in asymptomatic individuals as incidental findings. CT and MRI with intravenous contrast and a dedicated multiphase protocol are the mainstays of evaluation for indeterminate renal masses. A single-phase postcontrast dual-energy CT can be useful when a dedicated multiphase renal protocol CT is not available. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound with microbubble agents is a useful alternative for characterizing renal masses, especially for patients in whom iodinated CT contrast or gadolinium-based MRI contrast is contraindicated. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hematuria is a common reason for patients to be referred for imaging of the urinary tract. All patients diagnosed with hematuria should undergo a thorough history and physical examination, urinalysis, and serologic testing prior to any initial imaging. Ultrasound, CT, and MRI are the most common imaging modalities used to evaluate hematuria. This document discusses the following clinical scenarios for hematuria: initial imaging of microhematuria without risk factors or history of recent vigorous exercise, or presence of infection, or viral illness, or present or recent menstruation; initial imaging of microhematuria in patients with known risk factors and no history of recent vigorous exercise, or presence of infection, or viral illness, or present or recent menstruation or renal parenchymal disease; initial imaging of microhematuria in the pregnant patient and initial imaging of gross hematuria. Follow-up of normal or abnormal findings is beyond the scope of this review. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]