International Braz J Urol最新文献

Purpose: To assess the impact of thinness on the outcome of the percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).

Materials and methods: A matched case-control study was performed using a prospectively collected database of all patients who underwent PCNL between June 2011 and October 2021. The patients were stratified into two groups according to their phenotypic characteristics, arbitrarily defined according to their body mass index (BMI): <0kg/m2 (Group 1, very thin patients, G<20) and ≥25 kg/m2 (Group 2, non-thin patients, G≥25). Patients were randomly matched based on Guy's Stone Score (GSS) according to case complexity at a ratio of 1:3.

Results: A total of 204 patients were enrolled in this study: 51 patients (G<20) and 153 controls (G≥25). Complications occurred in 15.2% of the patients, with 5.4% of these complications classified as major complications (Clavien grade ≥ 3). According to complications there were no significant differences between the groups. The overall complication rates were 17.6% in the G<20 and 14.4% in the G≥25 (p = 0.653). The major complication rates were 3.9% in the G<20 and 5.8% in the G≥25 (p=0.429). No differences in transfusion or urinary fistula rates were found.

Conclusions: In this study, very thin patients were not at a higher risk of complications when submitted to PCNL than in those with a BMI of ≥25 kg/m2. Apparently, this technique can be used in these patients, just as it is used in any other type of patient, independently of their BMI.

Introduction: Endoscopic Combined Intrarenal Surgery (ECIRS) has emerged as a promising technique for the management of large and complex kidney stones, potentially offering advantages over traditional Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL). This study aims to evaluate best practices, outcomes, and future perspectives associated with ECIRS.

Materials and methods: A comprehensive PubMed search was conducted from 2008 to 2024, using MESH terms and the following key words: "ECIRS" and "Endoscopic Combined Intrarenal Surgery" The search yielded 157 articles, including retrospective cohort studies, two randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and four meta-analyses comparing ECIRS with PCNL. Most important findings were summarized regarding indications, patient positioning, kidney access, tract size, surgical outcomes, and complications.

Results: ECIRS demonstrated higher stone-free rate, lower complication rate, and a reduced need for multiple procedures compared to traditional PCNL. Additionally, ECIRS has the potential to integrate new technologies to further enhance outcomes.

Conclusion: ECIRS demonstrates significant advantages in the management of large kidney stones. Future research should focus on well-designed RCTs to provide robust evidence of its efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness, potentially establishing ECIRS as the first option treatment for complex kidney stones.

Introduction: Robotic Radical Prostatectomy using the Da-Vinci Single-Port (SP) robot can provide comparable functional and oncological outcomes with potential advantages pertaining to peri-operative morbidity, especially in patients with an extensive history of prior abdominal surgeries (1, 2).

Materials and methods: Our case is a 74-year-old male with a history of diabetes, cardiac bypass, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia, presenting with a PSA of 7.2. His MRI showed a PIRADS-5 lesion in the left apex and mid-gland peripheral zone, and he was diagnosed with unfavorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer after MRI guided fusion biopsy. His BMI was 31, and past surgical history was pertinent for two exploratory laparotomies due to gunshot wounds and a colostomy creation followed by reversal. The standardized steps of robotic radical prostatectomy were carried out using SP robotic platform performed by author SH (3, 4).

Results: Total operative time and estimated blood loss were 210 minutes and 150mL respectively. The patient was discharged on postoperative day one and final pathology showed adenocarcinoma of the prostate Gleason score 4+3=7, pT2NxR0 and negative surgical margins. The patient was continent four weeks after surgery and the PSA continues to be undetectable after three months.

Conclusion: Transvesical Radical prostatectomy using the single port platform provides acceptable oncological and functional outcomes and quicker recovery given decreased risk of ileus and peritoneal irritation. Given that the abdominal cavity is not violated, the risk of bowel or vascular injury is mitigated, especially in patients with a hostile abdomen.

Purpose: Vacuum-assisted mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (vmPCNL) is being increasingly adopted due to its faster operating times and lower incidence of postoperative infectious complications (IC), however, studies have been limited by small sample sizes. We hypothesize that vmPCNL is an efficacious treatment for renal stone disease with acceptable stone-free rates (SFR) and low incidence of IC. The objectives of this study were to measure SFR three months after surgery, determine the factors influencing SFR, and determine the rates of postoperative IC after vmPCNL.

Materials and methods: Seven hundred and sixty seven patients underwent vmPCNL for the treatment of renal stones > 20 mm at a single institution. Patients underwent postoperative computed tomography at three months to assess SFR. Postoperative fever and SIRS/Sepsis were recorded for individual patients. Multivariate logistics regression was performed to assess predictors of SFR.

Results: The SFR was found to be 73.7% at three months. Stone burden (OR 0.39, 95% CI [0.33-0.46]) and age (OR 1.03, 95% CI [1.01-1.04]) emerged as statistically significant predictors of SFR on multivariate analysis. 5.5% of patients experienced postoperative fever, while 2.9% experienced SIRS/Sepsis.

Conclusions: This is the largest continuous cohort of patients to undergo vmPCNL for stone disease and demonstrates that vmPCNL is safe and efficacious, with an SFR of 74% at three months. The incidence of postoperative fever and SIRS/Sepsis is 5.5% and 2.9% respectively. Further randomized studies with large sample sizes are required to ascertain the rates of these complications in comparison to conventional approaches.

Objectives: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC), laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC), and open radical cystectomy (ORC) in bladder cancer.

Methods: A literature search for network meta-analysis was conducted using international databases up to February 29, 2024. Outcomes of interest included baseline characteristics, perioperative outcomes and oncological outcomes.

Results: Forty articles were finally selected for inclusion in the network meta-analysis. Both LRC and RARC were associated with longer operative time, smaller amount of estimated blood loss, lower transfusion rate, shorter time to regular diet, fewer incidences of complications, and fewer positive surgical margin compared to ORC. LRC had a shorter time to flatus than ORC, while no difference between RARC and ORC was observed. Considering lymph node yield, there were no differences among LRC, RARC and ORC. In addition, there were statistically significant lower transfusion rates (OR=-0.15, 95% CI=-0.47 to 0.17), fewer overall complication rates (OR=-0.39, 95% CI=-0.79 to 0.00), fewer minor complication rates (OR=-0.23, 95% CI=-0.48 to 0.02), fewer major complication rates (OR=-0.23, 95% CI=-0.68 to 0.21), fewer positive surgical margin rates (OR=0.22, 95% CI=-0.27 to 0.68) in RARC group compared with LRC group.

Conclusion: LRC and RARC could be considered as a feasible and safe alternative to ORC for bladder cancer. Notably, compared with LRC, RARC may benefit from significantly lower transfusion rates, fewer complications and lower positive surgical margin rates. These data thus showed that RARC might improve the management of patients with muscle invasive or high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer.

Purpose: We reported, as a referral center in prostate cancer, our perspectives and experience performing Telesurgery using robotic surgery and 5G network.

Material and methods: We described and illustrated the Telesurgery applications and outcomes to treat a patient with prostate cancer located 1300 kilometers away from the surgeon (Beijing-Harbin) in China. We used the Edge Medical Robot (MP1000) in November 2023 in a 71-year-old patient with Gleason 6 (ISUP 1) in 8 cores from 13, PSA of 14 ng/dL, and clinical stage cT2a. MRI described a PIRADS 5 nodule on the left peripheral zone at the base, and 20gr prostate. We described details about the connection between centers, perioperative outcomes, and our perspectives as a referral center in prostate cancer.

Results: We had no delays, or problems with network connection between the centers. The procedure was performed in 60 minutes, with no intra- or postoperative complications. Estimated blood loss was 100 mL. The patient was ambulating soon after anesthesia recovery. Final pathology described a Gleason 6 (ISUP 1) involving the left base and left seminal vesicle, negative surgical margins, and no lymph node involvement (pT3bN0). The patient was continent soon after catheter removal (7 days).

Conclusion: As technological progress introduced novel robotic platforms and high-speed networks, the concept of Telesurgery became a tangible reality while 5G technology solved latency and transmission concerns. However, with these advancements, ethical considerations and regulatory frameworks should underline the importance of transparency and patient safety with responsible innovation in the field.

Introduction: The introduction of Single-Port (SP) platform opened the field to new surgical options, allowing to perform major urological robot-assisted procedures extraperitoneally and with a supine patient positioning (1-3). Nevertheless, a comprehensive description of different supine access options is still lacking (4-6). In this light, we provided a step-by-step guide of SP extraperitoneal supine access options also exploring preliminary surgical outcomes.

Materials and methods: Transvesical access was performed by a transversal incision 3cm above the pubic bone, after the anterior abdominal sheet incision, the bladder was insufflated with a flexible cystoscope and the detrusor muscle was incised at the level of the bladder dome. Similarly, the extraperitoneal access was carried out with a 4cm incision above the pubic bone, once visualized the preperitoneal space the prevesical fat was gently spread. The Low Anterior Access was performed with a 3cm incision at the McBurney point, the abdominal muscles were then spread. A gentle dissection was used laterally to develop the retroperitoneal space.

Results: Overall, sixteen different procedures were performed with supine extraperitoneal access on 623 consecutive patients. No intraoperative conversions occurred. The median access time was 16 (IQR 12-21), 11 (IQR 7-14) and 14 (IQR 10-18) minutes in case of transvesical, extraperitoneal and low anterior access, respectively. Notably, 81.5 % of patients were discharged on the same day with a postoperative opioid free rate of 73%.

Conclusion: The Atlas provides a comprehensive step-by-step guide to successfully perform all major urological SP procedures extraperitoneally and with supine patient positioning.

Purpose: Minimally invasive radical nephrectomy is often preferred for larger renal tumours not suitable for partial nephrectomy (1). When performed with a multiport robot, the procedure is routinely performed with a transperitoneal approach, with recent studies highlighting important factors for surgical outcomes, including predictive factors (2), segmental artery unclamping techniques (3), and comparisons of robotic techniques (4). This video shows that SP Robot-Assisted Radical Nephrectomy (RARN) via a lower anterior approach is valuable in challenging cases.

Materials and methods: We performed SP-RARN on two complex patients using a retroperitoneal lower anterior approach. The first patient, a 54-year-old female with a BMI of 36.8 kg/m², had a ventral hernia and bowel obstruction history, with a 9 cm right middle kidney mass. The second patient, a 58-year-old male with a BMI of 31.19 kg/m², had ESRD and was on peritoneal dialysis for 8 years, with a 3.4x3.7 cm mass in the right superior pole, suspected to be RCC. The surgical technique is detailed in the video.

Results: Both procedures were successful, with operative times of 173 and 203 minutes and blood loss of 150 mL. No complications occurred. Patients were discharged after 31 and 38 hours, respectively. Histopathology confirmed RCC. At the 3-month follow-up, no complications or readmissions were reported. Second patient continued peritoneal dialysis without issues.

Conclusion: Retroperitoneal SP-RARN via the lower anterior approach avoids the peritoneal cavity, making it suitable for certain patients. In these patients, more so than in others, this procedure is feasible, safe, and less morbid than the standard multiport approach.

Introduction: The ureteral access sheath (UAS) is a medical device that enables repeated entrance into the ureter and collecting system during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Its impact on stone-free rates, ureteral injuries, operative time, and postoperative complications remains controversial. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing RIRS with versus without UAS for urolithiasis management.

Purpose: To compare outcomes from retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for stone extraction with or without ureteral access sheath (UAS); evaluating stone-free rate (SFR), ureteral injuries, operative time, and postoperative complications.

Materials and methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library in June 2024 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety outcomes of UAS use in RIRS for urolithiasis treatment. Articles published between 2014 and 2024 were included. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) were calculated for binary and continuous outcomes, respectively.

Results: Five RCTs comprising 466 procedures were included. Of these, 246 (52.7%) utilized UAS. The follow-up ranged from 1 week to 1 month. UAS reduced the incidence of postoperative fever (RR 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-0.84; p=0.009), and postoperative infection (RR 0.50; 95% CI 0.30-0.83; p=0.008). There were no significant differences between groups in terms of SFR (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.99-1.11; p=0.10), ureteral injuries (RR 1.29; 95% CI 0.95-1.75; p=0.11), operative time (MD 3.56 minutes; 95% CI -4.15 to 11.27 minutes; p=0.36), or length of stay (MD 0.32 days; 95% CI -0.42 to 1.07 days; p=0.40).

Conclusion: UAS leads to a lower rate of post-operative fever and infection. However, UAS did not significantly reduce or increase the SFR or the rate of ureteral injuries during RIRS for patients with urolithiasis. The use of UAS should be considered to decrease the risk of infectious complications, particularly in those who may be at higher risk for such complications.