The comprehensive complication index (CCI): proposal of a new reporting standard for complications in major urological surgery.

PURPOSE: The comprehensive complication index (CCI) is a new tool for reporting the cumulative burden of postoperative complications on a continuous scale. This study validates the CCI for urological surgery and its benefits over the Clavien-Dindo-Classification (Clavien). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data from a prospectively maintained data base of all consecutive patients at a university care-center was analyzed. Complications after radical cystectomy (RC), radical prostatectomy (RP), and partial nephrectomy (PN) were classified using the CCI and Clavien system. Differences in complications between the CCI and the Clavien were assessed and correlation analyses performed. Sample size calculations for hypothetical clinical trials were compared between CCI and Clavien to evaluate whether the CCI would reduce the number of required patients in a clinical trial. RESULTS: 682 patients (172 RC, 297 RP, 213 PN) were analyzed. Overall, 9.4-46.6% of patients had > 1 complication cumulatively assessed with the CCI resulting in an upgrading in the Clavien classification for 2.4-32.4% of patients. Therefore, scores between the systems differed for RC: CCI (mean ± standard deviation) 26.3 ± 20.8 vs. Clavien 20.4 ± 16.7, p < 0.001; PN: CCI 8.4 ± 14.7 vs. Clavien 7.0 ± 11.8, p < 0.001 and RP: CCI 5.8 ± 11.7 vs. Clavien 5.3 ± 10.6, p = 0.102. The CCI was more accurate in predicting LOS after RC than Clavien (p < 0.001). Sample size calculations based in the CCI (for future hypothetical trials) resulted in a reduction of required patients for all procedures (- 25% RC, - 74% PN, - 80% RP). CONCLUSION: The CCI is more accurate to assess surgical complications and reduces required sample sizes that will facilitate the conduction of clinical trials.

Prophylactic abdominal or retroperitoneal drain placement in major uro-oncological surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies on radical prostatectomy, cystectomy and partial nephrectomy.

PURPOSE: To systematically analyze the impact of prophylactic abdominal or retroperitoneal drain placement or omission in uro-oncologic surgery. METHODS: This systematic review follows the Cochrane recommendations and was conducted in line with the PRISMA and the AMSTAR-II criteria. A comprehensive database search including Medline, Web-of-Science, and CENTRAL was performed based on the PICO criteria. All review steps were done by two independent reviewers. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane tool for randomized trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: The search identified 3427 studies of which eleven were eligible for qualitative and ten for quantitative analysis reporting on 3664 patients. Six studies addressed radical prostatectomy (RP), four studies partial nephrectomy (PN) and one study radical cystectomy. For RP a reduction in postoperative complications was found without drainage (odds ratio (OR)[95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.62[0.44;0.87], p = 0.006), while there were no differences for re-intervention (OR[CI]: 0.72[0.39;1.33], p = 0.300), lymphocele OR[CI]: 0.60[0.22;1.60], p = 0.310), hematoma (OR[CI]: 0.68[0.18;2.53], p = 0.570) or urinary retention (OR[CI]: 0.57[0.26;1.29], p = 0.180). For partial nephrectomy no differences were found for overall complications (OR[CI]: 0.99[0.65;1.51], p = 0.960) or re-intervention (OR[CI]: 1.16[0.31;4.38], p = 0.820). For RC, there were no differences for all parameters. The overall-quality of evidence was assessed as low. CONCLUSION: The omission of drains can be recommended for standardized RP and PN cases. However, deviations from the standard can still mandate the placement of a drain and remains surgeon preference. For RC, there is little evidence to recommend the omission of drains and future research should focus on this issue. REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER (PROSPERO): CRD42019122885.

Can an amino acid-based oral rehydration solution be effective in managing immune therapy-induced diarrhea?

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICPi) therapy has transformed the way we treat cancer. However, its immune related adverse events (irAEs) can be debilitating and life threatening. Immune therapy-induced diarrhea (ITID) is one of the most commonly encountered irAEs and can lead to expensive and prolonged hospitalizations. The current standard of care for grade 3 or 4 ITID involves ICPi discontinuation, the initiation of steroids, and infliximab for refractory disease. This treatment regimen reverses the desired anti-tumor effect of ICPis, can lead to side effects, and is cost-ineffective. We report the first case of the successful treatment of grade 3 ITID with steroids and an amino acid-based oral rehydration solution (AA-ORS), enterade. Research suggests that AA-ORS may be used to reduce diarrhea and adequately hydrate patients, in contrast to glucose-based oral rehydration solutions, which have been implicated as a contributing factor to diarrhea in cancer patients. We hypothesize that an AA-ORS may mitigate ITID via safer and more economically viable means than the current standard of care, but more controlled trials are needed to test this hypothesis.