Magnetic double-J stent: Evaluation of tolerance and impact on quality of life compared to traditional double-J stent.

INTRODUCTION: The placement of a ureteral stent is one of the most widely performed procedures in urology. It can have a negative impact on the patients' quality of life, requiring a cystoscopy for its removal. The objective of this study is to evaluate the symptoms and impact on quality of life derived from the use of a magnetic double-J stent (Black Star®) and compare them to those presented in patients with a traditional double-J stent (OptiMed®). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a comparative, prospective, randomized study in 46 patients who underwent ureterorenoscopy with double-J stent placement between August 2019 and June 2020. Of all patients included, 23 had a traditional double-J stent placed (group A) and 23 had a magnetic double-J stent (group B) placed. We evaluated the results of the Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ) in both groups, assessed the technical difficulty related to stent removal and the pain during the procedure using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). We also reviewed the need for medical attention due to problems related to the stent or after its removal. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between groups regarding the answers in the USSQ and the complications related to the use of the stent. Group B showed less pain (1.52 vs. 4, VAS, p = 0.001) and less difficulty during removal (1.61 vs. 3, p < 0.001) associated with a shorter procedure duration (11.65 min vs. 22.17 min p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The tolerance shown by the use of magnetic double-J is comparable to the tolerance of traditional stent, since it does not cause an increase in urinary symptoms nor worsens the quality of life of patients during its use.

Treatment for rectourethral fistulas after radical prostatectomy with biological material interposition through a perineal access.

INTRODUCTION: Rectal injury is a rare complication after extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The development of rectourethral fistulas (URF) from rectal injuries is one of the most feared and of more complex resolution in urology. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between 2013 and 2020 we have operated on a total of 5 patients with URF after extraperitoneal endoscopic radical prostatectomy through a perineal access using the interposition of biological material. All fistulas had a diameter of less than 6 mm at endoscopy and were less than 6 cm apart from the anal margin. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 64 years old. All patients had a previous bowel and urinary diversion for at least 3 months. Under general anesthesia and with the patient in a forced lithotomy position, fistulorraphy and interposition of biological material of porcine origin (lyophilized porcine dermis [Permacol®]) were performed through a perineal access. Mean operative time was 174 min (140-210). Most patients were discharged on the third postoperative day. The bladder catheter was left in place for a mean of 40 days (30-60). Prior to its removal, cystography and a Gastrografin® barium enema were performed, showing resolution of the fistula in all cases. CONCLUSIONS: The interposition of biological material from porcine dermis through perineal approach is a safe alternative with good results in patients submitted to urethrorectal fistulorraphy after radical prostatectomy.

[New recommendations for prostate cancer screening with PSA]. / Nuevas recomendaciones en el screening de cáncer de próstata mediante PSA.

Prostate cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in men and the second cause of death in those worldwide. The fact that is a tumor with a long latency period has led to a confusion in the convenience of its diagnosis and treatment in patients at an early stage. Classically, European and American societies have not recommended prostate cancer screening with PSA, allowing physicians take this decision. In 2012, after many years full of controversy, the American organization United States Preventive Task Force recommended to abandon its use. The results of these statements carried an increase in the incidence of the metastatic prostate cancer and, therefore, a rise in its mortality. In 2018, after these consequences, the European Association of Urology released new recommendations in favor of screening based on PSA for the first time. In 2019, guidelines were updated with no changes in its recommendations.

Minimally invasive treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Our initial experience with Urolift® under local anaesthesia and sedation. / Tratamiento mínimamente invasivo de los síntomas del tracto urinario inferior por hiperplasia benigna de próstata. Nuestra experiencia inicial con Urolift® bajo anestesia local y sedación.

INTRODUCTION: The treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia with the Urolift® system has been carried out since 2005 with good results in the medium term. In this work, we present our experience performing this technique under local anaesthesia and sedation in 2 Spanish centres. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective study was conducted with 20 patients treated with Urolift® under local anaesthesia and sedation between April 2017 and April 2018. The anaesthesia protocol consisted in the placement of 2 lubricants with cold lidocaine (the first one, 10min before the intervention, and the second one, just before introducing the cystoscopy). A prostate block (similar to the one employed in prostate biopsies) was administered to one third of the patients and 1mg of intravenous midazolam was added if required during the procedure. Our primary objective is to evaluate the tolerability of this procedure under local anaesthesia using the validated Visual Analogue Scale measurement instrument. RESULTS: The procedure has been performed under the same anaesthetic protocol to 20 patients from 2 different centres. The average pain scores on the Visual Analogue Scale were 1.37 for the cystoscopy procedure and 1.19 for the placement of the implants. When asked whether the pain sensations had been higher, lower or the same during the procedure or at the preoperative cystoscopy, only 18% of the patients responded it was higher. In all cases there was a good tolerance to the procedure, and changes to the anaesthesia protocols were never required. CONCLUSIONS: We consider that the Urolift® system under local anaesthesia and sedation is a well-tolerated, safe and effective method for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia.