RESUMO
PURPOSE: Prediction models are recommended by national guidelines to support clinical decision making in prostate cancer. Existing models to predict pathological outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP)-the Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK) models, Partin tables, and the Briganti nomogram-have been developed using data from tertiary care centers and may not generalize well to other settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from a regional cohort (Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative [MUSIC]) were used to develop models to predict extraprostatic extension (EPE), seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), lymph node invasion (LNI), and nonorgan-confined disease (NOCD) in patients undergoing RP. The MUSIC models were compared against the MSK models, Partin tables, and Briganti nomogram (for LNI) using data from a national cohort (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results [SEER] registry). RESULTS: We identified 7,491 eligible patients in the SEER registry. The MUSIC model had good discrimination (SEER AUC EPE: 0.77; SVI: 0.80; LNI: 0.83; NOCD: 0.77) and was well calibrated. While the MSK models had similar discrimination to the MUSIC models (SEER AUC EPE: 0.76; SVI: 0.80; LNI: 0.84; NOCD: 0.76), they overestimated the risk of EPE, LNI, and NOCD. The Partin tables had inferior discrimination (SEER AUC EPE: 0.67; SVI: 0.76; LNI: 0.69; NOCD: 0.72) as compared to other models. The Briganti LNI nomogram had an AUC of 0.81 in SEER but overestimated the risk. CONCLUSIONS: New models developed using the MUSIC registry outperformed existing models and should be considered as potential replacements for the prediction of pathological outcomes in prostate cancer.
Assuntos
Técnicas de Apoio para a Decisão , Metástase Linfática/diagnóstico , Nomogramas , Prostatectomia , Neoplasias da Próstata/cirurgia , Idoso , Tomada de Decisão Clínica/métodos , Humanos , Linfonodos/patologia , Metástase Linfática/patologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Invasividade Neoplásica/diagnóstico , Próstata/diagnóstico por imagem , Próstata/patologia , Próstata/cirurgia , Neoplasias da Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Próstata/patologia , Programa de SEER/estatística & dados numéricos , Glândulas Seminais/patologiaRESUMO
PURPOSE: Ureteral stents are commonly placed after ureteroscopy. Although studies indicate that stents are associated with patient discomfort, their impact on downstream health services use is unclear. We examined patterns of stent utilization in Michigan and their association with unplanned health care encounters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative's Reducing Operative Complications from Kidney Stones (MUSIC ROCKS) clinical registry to identify ureteroscopy cases between 2016 and 2019. Factors associated with stent placement were examined using bivariate and multivariable statistics. Using multivariable logistic regression, we evaluated whether stent placement was associated with emergency department visits and hospitalizations within 30 days. RESULTS: We identified 9,662 ureteroscopies and a stent was placed in 7,025 (73%) of these. Frequency of stent use across the 137 urologists varied (11%-100%, p <0.001) and was not associated with total case volume. Factors associated with stent use included age and stone size. Pre-stented cases and renal stones had a decreased odds of stent placement. On multivariable analysis after adjusting for risk factors, stent placement was associated with a 1.25 higher odds of emergency department visit (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.01-1.54, p=0.043) but not hospitalization (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.94-1.76, p=0.12). In a single high volume practice, 0.5% of cases that omitted a stent required urgent stenting postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variation in the use of stents in Michigan, irrespective of case volume. Stent placement significantly increased the odds of an emergency department visit after surgery. Importantly, stent omission rarely required subsequent urgent stent placement.
Assuntos
Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/estatística & dados numéricos , Cálculos Renais/cirurgia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Stents , Ureter/cirurgia , Ureteroscopia , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Michigan , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
PURPOSE: AUA guidelines recommend ureteroscopy as first line therapy for patients on anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy and advocate using a ureteral access sheath. We examined practice patterns and unplanned health care use for these patients in Michigan. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) clinical registry we identified ureteroscopy cases from 2016 to 2019. We assessed outcomes and adherence to guidelines based on therapy at time of ureteroscopy: 1) anticoagulant: continuous warfarin or novel oral agent therapy; 2) antiplatelet: continuous clopidogrel or aspirin therapy; 3) control: not on anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapy. We fit multivariate models to assess anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy association with emergency department visits, hospitalization and ureteral access sheath use. RESULTS: In total, 9,982 ureteroscopies were performed across 31 practices with 3.1% and 7.8% on anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy, respectively. There were practice (0% to 21%) and surgeon (0% to 35%) variations in performing ureteroscopy on patients on anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapy regardless of volume. After adjusting for risk factors, anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy was not associated with emergency department visits. Hospitalization rates in anticoagulant, antiplatelet and control groups were 4.3%, 5.5% and 3.2%, respectively, and significantly increased with antiplatelet therapy (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.02-2.14). Practice-level ureteral access sheath use varied (23% to 100%) and was not associated with anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapy. Limitations include inability to risk stratify between type/dosage of anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapy. CONCLUSIONS: We found practice-level and surgeon-level variation in performing ureteroscopy while on anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapy. Ureteroscopy on anticoagulant is safe. However, antiplatelet therapy increases the risk of hospitalization. Despite guideline recommendations, ureteral access sheath use is not associated with anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapy.
Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/administração & dosagem , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/administração & dosagem , Padrões de Prática Médica/estatística & dados numéricos , Ureteroscopia/métodos , Idoso , Feminino , Fidelidade a Diretrizes , Humanos , Michigan , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Segurança do Paciente , Sistema de Registros , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The surgical tool-box for urinary stone disease is growing. In this review, we discuss recent developments in the surgical management of urolithiasis, with emphasis on tailoring the management to the individual patient, and attention to the quality of care. RECENT FINDINGS: Shockwave lithotripsy remains a popular noninvasive treatment option for patients, with new data emerging on how to improve treatment outcomes as well as its limitations. Next-generation holmium lasers are expanding the role of dusting techniques for ureteroscopy but further studies are needed to assess safety and clinical outcomes. Advances in miniaturization and patient positioning are propelling percutaneous renal stone surgery toward endoscopic combined intrarenal and simultaneous bilateral surgery for patients with complex stone disease. SUMMARY: Stone management will be increasingly personalized to the unique qualities of the patient, stone, desired outcome, and available expertise and technology. Future studies assessing the quality of stone surgery should incorporate objective metrics to better delineate the success and cost of the different techniques available.
Assuntos
Litotripsia/métodos , Cálculos Urinários/cirurgia , Urolitíase/cirurgia , Humanos , Cálculos Renais , Litotripsia/tendências , Resultado do Tratamento , Ureteroscopia/tendências , Cálculos Urinários/diagnóstico por imagem , Cálculos Urinários/terapia , Urolitíase/diagnóstico por imagemAssuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus/prevenção & controle , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos/estatística & dados numéricos , Controle de Infecções/métodos , Cálculos Renais/terapia , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Pneumonia Viral/prevenção & controle , Telemedicina/estatística & dados numéricos , COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Cálculos Renais/diagnóstico , Cálculos Renais/epidemiologia , Masculino , Assistência ao Paciente/métodos , Seleção de Pacientes , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Qualidade da Assistência à Saúde , Medição de Risco , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Telemedicina/métodos , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados UnidosRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a model to predict whether patients undergoing ureteroscopy (URS) will receive a stent. METHODS: Using registry data obtained from the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative Reducing Operative Complications from Kidney Stones initiative, we identified patients undergoing URS from 2016 to 2020. We used patients' age, sex, body mass index, size and location of the largest stone, current stent in place, history of any kidney stone procedure, procedure type, and acuity to fit a multivariable logistic regression model to a derivation cohort consisting of a random two-thirds of episodes. Model discrimination and calibration were evaluated in the validation cohort. A sensitivity analysis examined urologist variation using generalized mixed-effect models. RESULTS: We identified 15,048 URS procedures, of which 11,471 (76%) had ureteral stents placed. Older age, male sex, larger stone size, the largest stone being in the ureteropelvic junction, no prior stone surgery, no stent in place, a planned procedure type of laser lithotripsy, and urgent procedure were associated with a higher risk of stent placement. The model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.69 (95% CI 0.67, 0.71). Incorporating urologist-level variation improved the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve to 0.83 (95% CI 0.82, 0.84). CONCLUSION: Using a large clinical registry, we developed a multivariable regression model to predict ureteral stent placement following URS. Though well-calibrated, the model had modest discrimination due to heterogeneity in practice patterns in stent placement across urologists.
Assuntos
Cálculos Renais , Litotripsia a Laser , Litotripsia , Ureter , Cálculos Ureterais , Humanos , Masculino , Ureteroscopia/métodos , Cálculos Ureterais/terapia , Cálculos Renais/cirurgia , Ureter/cirurgia , Stents , Resultado do Tratamento , Litotripsia/métodosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Despite AUA guidelines providing criteria for ureteral stent omission after ureteroscopy for nephrolithiasis, stenting rates in practice remain high. Because pre-stenting may be associated with improved patient outcomes, we assessed the impact of stent omission vs placement in pre-stented and non-pre-stented patients undergoing ureteroscopy on postoperative health care utilization in Michigan. METHODS: Using the MUSIC (Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative) registry (2016-2019), we identified pre-stented and non-pre-stented patients with low comorbidity undergoing single-stage ureteroscopy for ≤1.5 cm stones with no intraoperative complications. We assessed variation in stent omission for practices/urologists with ≥5 cases. Using multivariable logistic regression, we evaluated whether stent placement in pre-stented patients was associated with emergency department visits and hospitalizations within 30 days of ureteroscopy. RESULTS: We identified 6,266 ureteroscopies from 33 practices and 209 urologists, of which 2,244 (35.8%) were pre-stented. Pre-stented cases had higher rates of stent omission vs non-pre-stented cases (47.3% vs 26.3%). Among the 17 urology practices with ≥5 cases, stent omission rates in pre-stented patients varied widely (0%-77.8%). Among the 156 urologists with ≥5 cases, stent omission rates in pre-stented patients varied substantially (0%-100%); 34/152 (22.4%) never performed stent omission. Adjusting for risk factors, stent placement in pre-stented patients was associated with increased emergency department visits (OR 2.24, 95% CI:1.42-3.55) and hospitalizations (OR 2.19, 95% CI:1.12-4.26). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-stented patients undergoing stent omission after ureteroscopy have lower unplanned health care utilization. Stent omission is underutilized in these patients, making them an ideal group for quality improvement efforts to avoid routine stent placement after ureteroscopy.
Assuntos
Cálculos Renais , Ureter , Humanos , Ureteroscopia/efeitos adversos , Ureter/cirurgia , Cálculos Renais/etiologia , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde , Stents/efeitos adversosRESUMO
Objective: To bridge the gap between evidence and clinical judgement, we defined scenarios appropriate for ureteral stent omission after uncomplicated ureteroscopy (URS) using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM). We retrospectively assessed rates of appropriate stent omission, with the goal to implement these criteria in clinical practice. Methods: A panel of 15 urologists from the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) met to define uncomplicated URS and the variables that influence stent omission decision-making. Over two rounds, they scored clinical scenarios for Appropriateness Criteria (AC) for stent omission based on a combination of variables. AC were defined by median scores: 1 to 3 (inappropriate), 4 to 6 (uncertain), and 7 to 9 (appropriate). Multivariable analysis determined the association of each variable with AC scores. Uncomplicated URS cases in the MUSIC registry were assigned AC scores and stenting rates assessed. Results: Seven variables affecting stent decision-making were identified. Of the 144 scenarios, 26 (18%) were appropriate, 88 (61%) inappropriate, and 30 (21%) uncertain for stent omission. Most scenarios appropriate for omission were pre-stented (81%). Scenarios with ureteral access sheath or stones >10mm were only appropriate if pre-stented. Stenting rates of 5,181 URS cases correlated with AC scores. Stents were placed in 61% of cases appropriate for omission (practice range, 25% to 98%). Conclusion: We defined objective variables and AC for stent omission following uncomplicated URS. AC scores correlated with stenting rates but there was substantial practice variation. Our findings demonstrate that the appropriate use of stent omission is underutilized.
RESUMO
Introduction: Ureteral access sheaths (UASs) are frequently used during ureteroscopy (URS), but their use is not without potential risk. We investigated patterns of UAS use and associated outcomes across practices in Michigan within a quality improvement collaborative. Methods: The Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) Reducing Operative Complications from Kidney Stones (ROCKS) initiative maintains a web-based, prospective clinical registry of patients undergoing URS for urinary stone disease (USD). We analyzed all patients undergoing primary URS for renal and ureteral stones from June 2016 to July 2018 in the ROCKS registry. We determined rates of UAS usage across practices and associated outcomes, including 30-day emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalization, as well as stone-free rates. Using multivariate logistical regression, we determined the predictors of UAS use as well as outcomes, including stone-free rates, ED visits, and hospitalizations, associated with UAS use. Results: Of the 5316 URS procedures identified, UASs were used in 1969 (37.7%) cases. Stones were significantly larger and more likely to be located in the kidney in cases with UAS use. UAS use during URS varied greatly across practices (1.9%-96%, p < 0.05). After adjusting for clinical and surgical risk factors, UAS use significantly increased the odds of postoperative ED visits (odds ratio [OR] = 1.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.17-1.93, p < 0.05) and hospitalization (OR = 1.77, 95% CI 1.22-2.56, p < 0.05) as well as decreased the odds of being stone free (OR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.57-0.99, p < 0.05). Conclusions: In the current study, UAS use during URS for USD was not associated with an increased likelihood of being stone free; moreover, it increased the odds of a postoperative ED visit and or hospitalization. Our findings demonstrate that UAS use is not without risk and should be employed judiciously.
Assuntos
Cálculos Renais , Ureter , Cálculos Ureterais , Humanos , Cálculos Renais/cirurgia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Estudos Prospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Ureter/cirurgia , Cálculos Ureterais/cirurgia , UreteroscopiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate patient factors associated with post-ureteroscopy opioid prescriptions, provider-level variation in opioid prescribing, and the relationship between opioid-free discharges and ED visits. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of a prospective cohort study of adults age 18 years and older who underwent primary ureteroscopy for urinary stones from June 2016 to September 2019 within the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) Reducing Operative Complications from Kidney Stones (ROCKS) quality improvement initiative. Postoperative opioid prescription trends and variation among practices and surgeons were examined. Multivariable logistic regression models defined risk factors for receipt of opioid prescriptions. The association among opioid prescriptions and postoperative ED visits within 30 days of surgery was assessed among complete case and propensity matched cohorts, matched on all measured characteristics other than opioid receipt. RESULTS: 13,143 patients underwent ureteroscopy with 157 urologists across 28 practices. Post-ureteroscopy opioid prescriptions and ED visits declined (86% to 39%, P<.001; 10% to 6%, P<.001, respectively). Practice and surgeon-level opioid prescribing varied from 8% to 98%, and 0% to 98%, respectively. Patient-related factors associated with opioid receipt included male, younger age, and history of chronic pain. Procedure-related factors associated with opioid receipt included pre- and post-ureteroscopy ureteral stenting and access sheath use. An opioid-free discharge was not associated with increased odds of an ED visit (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62-0.95, P=.014). CONCLUSIONS: There was no increase in ED utilization among those not prescribed an opioid after ureteroscopy, suggesting their routine use may not be necessary in this setting.
Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Prescrições de Medicamentos/estatística & dados numéricos , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/estatística & dados numéricos , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Alta do Paciente , Readmissão do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Melhoria de Qualidade , Ureteroscopia , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Despite the sustained public health efforts to decrease cigarette smoking, there is an increasing trend in the use of alternative tobacco products that are perceived by some as less harmful. One example is hookah smoking. This study aimed to assess hookah trends among White Americans. METHODS: Two hundred and forty-five White American adults residing in southeast Michigan answered a self-administered standardized questionnaire that included basic demographics, socioeconomic status, and questions related to hookah smoking behavior. Logistic regression was used to determine risk indicators for hookah smoking. RESULTS: The combined prevalence of hookah smoking in the White American study population was 19%, with 10% of the sample smoking hookah only and 9% smoking both hookah and cigarettes. Approximately 19% of respondents believed that smoking hookah was less harmful than smoking cigarettes. Significant risk indicators for smoking hookah were being younger than 22 years and living with a family member who used tobacco. DISCUSSION: In addition to reporting the prevalence of use in this important group of potential users, we outline important sociodemographic risk factors for hookah use in a non-Arab American population. More research is needed with a larger population to better understand this new tobacco trend in order to curb a new potential health threat.
Assuntos
Fumar/epidemiologia , Fumar/psicologia , População Branca/psicologia , População Branca/estatística & dados numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Projetos Piloto , Prevalência , Fatores de Risco , Fumar/etnologia , Classe Social , Fatores Socioeconômicos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto JovemRESUMO
The purpose of the study was to explore attitudes/beliefs in men attending an urban health fair to explore barriers to prostate cancer (PCa) screening. Five hundred and forty-four men attending the PCa booth at the fair in 2014 or 2015 completed questionnaires about PCa. Data were examined using Pearson's χ2, Fisher's Exact, and Wilcoxon rank tests after grouping men by African American (AA) and non-African American ethnicity. Three hundred and twenty-six (60%) men were AA and two hundred and eighteen (40%) were non-AA (89% white). Median age (54 vs. 56 years) and prior PCa screening were similar between AA and non-AA; income ( p = .044) and education ( p = .0002) differed. AA men were less likely to have researched prostate-specific antigen (PSA) on the internet ( p = .003), but more used TV ( p = .003) and media ( p = .0014) as information sources. Family members had a stronger influence over screening decisions for AA men ( p = .005). After reading PSA information, AA men were more likely to still be confused ( p = .008). A higher proportion of AA men were less worried about dying from PCa ( p = .0006), but would want treatment immediately instead of watchful waiting ( p < .0001). Interestingly, a higher proportion of AA men indicated that they would prefer not to know if they had PCa ( p = .001). Ultimately, more AA men had a PSA done (98.4% vs. 95.1%; p = .031). When considering screening eligible men, a higher proportion of AA men had an abnormal PSA (13.1% vs. 5.3%; p = .037). AA men's beliefs surrounding PCa differ from non-AA men, and should be considered when developing culturally appropriate education, screening, and treatment strategies for this group.