Safety and efficacy of ambulatory tubeless mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the management of 10-25-mm renal calculi: A retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of ambulatory mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) in a totally tubeless exit (without a nephrostomy tube or an internal stent) and tubeless exit (without a nephrostomy tube but with an internal stent) for the treatment of renal calculi 10-25 mm in size. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent mini-PCNL at our institution between September 2018 and September 2022. The study included a cohort of 95 patients diagnosed with renal calculi measuring 10-25 mm. All patients underwent a computed tomography (CT) renal colic scan preoperatively, on postoperative day one (POD 1), and at three-month followup. Patient demographics and outcome parameters were recorded, including stone characteristics, operative time, hospital stay, stone-free rate (SFR), complication rates, and subsequent emergency room (ER) visits. Patients were considered stone-free if they had no fragments or residual fragments measuring <4 mm. RESULTS: The median maximum stone diameter was 16 mm (10-25 mm). Twenty-nine patients (30.5%) had multiple renal calculi. The median operative time was 64 (38-135) minutes. Eighty-six patients (90.5%) underwent a totally tubeless procedure, without a nephrostomy tube or an internal stent. All patients were discharged home on the same operative day with a median hospitalization time of six hours. Seven (7.4%) postoperative ER visits were recorded, and two (2.1%) led to hospital readmission. The frequency of grade I, II, and III Clavien-Dindo complications were 18 (18.9%), one (1.1%), and one (1.1%), respectively. The SFR on POD 1 and three-month followup was 73.7% and 92.6%, respectively. None of the patients in the study required retreatment. CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory tubeless mini-PCNL is a safe and effective treatment option for 10-25 mm renal stones. Experienced institutions can safely adopt ambulatory mini-PCNL as a treatment option without an increased risk of postoperative complications, ER visits, or hospital readmissions.

Efficacy and durability of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in the management of acute and chronic urinary retention: A retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Our study aimed to assess the efficacy and durability of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in managing acute urinary retention (AUR), neurogenic chronic urinary retention (NCUR), and non-neurogenic chronic urinary retention (NNCUR). We also sought to compare outcomes in patients with preoperative urinary retention (UR) to those without. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis using prospectively gathered data from men who underwent HoLEP at our institution between October 2017 and July 2022. Patient demographics and outcome measures were recorded, including indications for the procedure, median urinary volume drained, or median postvoid residual urine volume (PVR) before catheterization or HoLEP. Chronic urinary retention (CUR) was defined as PVR >300 mL in males able to void and initial catheter drainage >1000 mL in males unable to void, in the absence of pain. NCUR and NNCUR were differentiated based on the presence of any significant illness or injury with a neurologic impact on the bladder. All patients had postoperative followup visits at one, three, six, and 12 months. Our evaluation included the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality-of-life (QoL) assessment, maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), PVR, and catheter-free status. RESULTS: Three hundred sixty-eight males who underwent HoLEP were included in our study. The UR group consisted of 189 patients (70 AUR, 42 NCUR, and 77 NNCUR), and the lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) group was comprised of 179 individuals. There were no statistically significant differences between the NCUR and NNCUR subgroups regarding demographics and outcomes. At 12 months postoperative, the AUR group had a higher catheter-free rate than the CUR group (p=0.04), and other outcome variables were comparable between the two cohorts. The UR group had a significantly lower QoL score at one month (p=0.01) and a significantly lower IPSS score at one and 12 months (p=0.034 and p=0.018, respectively) than the LUTS cohort. During all followup visits, the UR group had a significantly higher PVR than the LUTS cohort. The successful first trial of void (TOV) rate for the UR and LUTS groups was 81% and 83.2%, respectively. At 12 months postoperative, the catheter-free rate for the UR and LUTS cohorts was 96.3% and 99.4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: HoLEP is an effective and durable treatment for UR with a high catheter-free rate and comparable outcomes when performed to manage LUTS.

Efficacy of GreenLight laser prostatectomy in urinary retention.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and durability of GreenLight laser prostatectomy for the management of acute urinary retention (AUR) and chronic urinary retention (CUR) and to determine outcomes compared to patients without preoperative urinary retention (UR). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of prospectively collected data from individuals who underwent GreenLight laser prostatectomy at our institution from May 2018 to July 2022. Patient demographics and outcome measures were recorded, including indications for the procedure, median urinary volume drained, or median postvoid residual urine volume (PVR) before catheterization or GreenLight laser prostatectomy. CUR was defined as PVR >300 mL in males able to void and initial catheter drainage >1000 mL in males unable to void in the absence of pain. All patients had postoperative followup visits at one, three, six, and 12 months. Our evaluation included the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality-of-life (QoL) assessment, maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), PVR, and catheter-free status. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-eight males who underwent GreenLight laser prostatectomy were included in our study. The UR group consisted of 88 patients (50 AUR and 38 CUR), and the lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) group was comprised of 80 individuals. There were no statistically significant differences between the AUR and CUR subgroups regarding demographics. The UR group had a significantly higher age and a significantly higher postoperative catheterization time compared to the LUTS cohort. The CUR subgroup had a significantly higher PVR at one, three, and six months compared to the AUR subgroup, although other outcome measures were similar between the two cohorts. During three- and six-month followup visits, the UR group had a significantly higher PVR than the LUTS cohort. At 12 months postoperative, the LUTS group had a higher catheter-free rate than the UR group (p=0.001). The successful first trial of void (TOV) rate for the UR and LUTS groups were 83% and 80%, respectively. At 12-month followup, the catheter-free rate for the UR and LUTS cohorts was 87.5% and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: GreenLight laser prostatectomy is an effective and durable treatment for UR, with a high catheter-free rate and comparable outcomes when performed to manage LUTS.

Safety and clinical outcomes of GreenLight laser prostatectomy in octogenarians.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated the impact of age on perioperative morbidity and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing GreenLight laser prostatectomy for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of prospectively collected data from individuals who underwent GreenLight laser prostatectomy from May 2018 to July 2022. Patient demographics and outcome measures were recorded, including indications for the procedure and American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) scores. All patients had postoperative followup visits at one, three, six, and 12 months. Our evaluation included the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS ), quality of life (QoL) assessment, maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual volume (PVR), and catheter-free status. RESULTS: One-hundred-sixty-eight males who underwent GreenLight laser prostatectomy were included. The non-octogenarian group consisted of 111 patients and the octogenarian group comprised 57 individuals. Based on ASA scores, most octogenarians were deemed high-risk (ASA III: 91.2%), while over half of non-octogenarians were lower-risk (ASA II: 53.2%) (p<0.001). Intraoperative parameters, including operative time, vaporization time, lasing time, and energy did not differ significantly between groups. There was no difference in the proportion of intraoperative complications between non-octogenarians and octogenarians (0.9% vs. 3.5%). Postoperative complications were not statistically significant between the two groups (p=0.608). There was also no observed difference in the proportion of patients requiring readmission (p=0.226) or retreatment (p=1.0). CONCLUSIONS: GreenLight laser prostatectomy is a safe and effective treatment for BPH regardless of age. It provides similar surgical and functional outcomes as younger men while maintaining the QoL of octogenarians.

Same-day trial of void and discharge following standard vs. MOSESTM holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: A single-center experience.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to compare perioperative and postoperative outcomes and to assess the safety and feasibility of same-day trial of void (TOV) in patients who underwent standard holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) vs. MOSESTM HoLEP (MoLEP). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of prospectively collected data of patients that underwent HoLEP (100 W) or MoLEP (120 W) with same-day catheter removal three hours postoperatively at our institution from August 2018 to September 2021. Patient demographics, intraoperative parameters, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Data were compared as means with standard deviation and medians with interquartile range (IQR) or numbers and percentages. Continuous and categorical variables were assessed using the Mann-Whitney U test and Chi-squared test, respectively. Predictors of shorter enucleation time and failed same-day TOV were investigated. RESULTS: Of the 90 patients included, 28 underwent HoLEP while 62 had MoLEP. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the successful TOV (23 [82%] vs. 58 [93.5%], p=0.1) and readmission rate (3 [10.7%] vs. 1 [1.6%], p=0.08); however, the MoLEP group had a significantly shorter mean enucleation time (p<0.001), mean hemostasis time (p<0.001), mean morcellation time (p=0.003), and lower mean energy used (p<0.001). On the logistic regression model, MoLEP (odds ratio [OR] 0.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.007-0.19, p<0.001), lower preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.01-1.55, p=0.03), and smaller prostate size (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02-1.09, p<0.001) were independent predictors of shorter enucleation time. History of preoperative retention was the only significant factor associated with a failed same-day TOV (p=0.04). There was no difference in intraoperative or postoperative complication rates or postoperative functional outcomes between the two technologies. CONCLUSIONS: Same-day TOV and discharge are feasible following standard HoLEP and MoLEP, with comparable outcomes; however, the use of MOSESTM technology offered better enucleation efficiency with excellent hemostatic potential. Preoperative retention was the only predictor of failed same-day TOV.

Comparative analysis of MOSESTM technology versus novel thulium fiber laser (TFL) for transurethral enucleation of the prostate: A single-institutional study.

INTRODUCTION: Novel laser technologies have been developed for the minimally invasive surgical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). The objective of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of MOSESTM technology versus the thulium fiber laser (TFL) in patients with BPH undergoing transurethral enucleation of the prostate. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of prospectively collected data of eighty-two patients who underwent transurethral enucleation of the prostate using MOSESTM or TFL technologies from August 2020 to September 2021. Preoperative and intraoperative parameters, in addition to postoperative outcomes, were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Twenty patients underwent transurethral enucleation of the prostate with TFL, while 62 had MOSESTM HoLEP. No statistically significant difference in preoperative characteristics was observed between the groups. Patients in the TFL group had longer median enucleation, hemostasis, and morcellation times (p < 0.001) than those in the MOSESTM cohort. The longer morcellation time of TFL is mostly related to less visibility. The postoperative outcomes IPSS, QoL, Qmax, and post void residual (PVR), were comparable between the groups at 1, 3 and 6 months. The incidence of urge urinary incontinence (p = 0.79), stress urinary incontinence (p = 0.97), and hospital readmission rates (p = 0.1) were comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: A satisfactory safety and efficacy profile with comparable postoperative outcomes was demonstrated for both techniques; though, MOSESTM technology was superior to TFL in terms of shorter overall operative time.

Factors Predicting Successful Same-Day Trial of Void (TOV) After Laser Vaporization of the Prostate.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and efficacy of same-day urethral catheter removal after laser vaporization of the prostate and to identify factors contributing to a successful trial of void (TOV). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 98 patients who underwent laser vaporization of the prostate using GreenLight or Holmium Xpeeda laser fibers from April 2018 to March 2021. All patients included in the study were offered a same-day TOV and had their catheters removed 3 hours postoperatively. Patient demographics, intraoperative parameters, and postoperative outcomes were collected and analyzed. Patients who were medically unfit or those on antiplatelet or anticoagulant medications were excluded. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to determine potential predictors of a failed TOV. RESULTS: The median age of included patients was 69 years (56-86) with a prostate size of 54 grams (40-78.4). The median operative time was 50 minute (20-93). 72 patients (73.5%) had a successful TOV without the need for urethral catheter reinsertion. The median hospital stay for patients was 5 hours. Preoperative post-void residual (PVR) urine was the only predictor of a successful TOV on both univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. CONCLUSION: Same-day catheter removal following laser vaporization of the prostate is a feasible option with a 73.5% success rate.

Miniaturized Ambulatory Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Versus Flexible Ureteroscopy in the Management of Lower Calyceal Renal Stones 10-20 mm: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of ambulatory mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (Mini-PCNL) and flexible ureteroscope (F-URS) in treating 10-20 mm lower calyceal stones using propensity score matching analysis (PSM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 136 adult patients that underwent Mini-PCNL or F-URS for a single lower calyx calculus. Participants that underwent F-URS were allocated to Group I, while those who underwent Mini-PCNL were assigned to Group II. Patients were discharged on the same day and followed up by CT after 3 months. Both groups were matched by stone size and density using propensity stone matching (PSM) and the matched group were further compared. RESULTS: Before matching, there were statistical differences in stone size (P = .02), preoperative hydronephrosis (P = .004), and Hounsfield Unit (P = .04) between both groups. A logistic regression model was created between independent variables such as stone size and density. The new groups following PSM were statistically similar in terms of age, BMI, stone size, and HFU (P = .43, P = .74, P = .49, P = .36). The stone-free rates after PSM was not significantly higher in the Mini-PCNL group than the F-URS group (91.7% vs 81.7%, respectively P = .1) while the operative time for the F-URS group was significantly shorter than the Mini-PCNL group 54 (49-64.3) minutes vs 68.2 (62-73.5) minutes, respectively, P = .045. CONCLUSION: Ambulatory Mini-PCNL and F-URS have a comparable hospital stay, stone-free rates, and complication rates for treating lower calyceal stones 10-20 mm. Both techniques may be considered acceptable treatment options, with a prolonged operative time in Mini-PCNL.