Dietary treatment of urinary risk factors for renal stone formation. A review of CLU Working Group.

OBJECTIVE: Diet interventions may reduce the risk of urinary stone formation and its recurrence, but there is no conclusive consensus in the literature regarding the effectiveness of dietary interventions and recommendations about specific diets for patients with urinary calculi. The aim of this study was to review the studies reporting the effects of different dietary interventions for the modification of urinary risk factors in patients with urinary stone disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search of the Pubmed database literature up to July 1, 2014 for studies on dietary treatment of urinary risk factors for urinary stone formation was conducted according to a methodology developed a priori. Studies were screened by titles and abstracts for eligibility. Data were extracted using a standardized form and the quality of evidence was assessed. RESULTS: Evidence from the selected studies were used to form evidence-based guideline statements. In the absence of sufficient evidence, additional statements were developed as expert opinions. CONCLUSIONS: General measures: Each patient with nephrolithiasis should undertake appropriate evaluation according to the knowledge of the calculus composition. Regardless of the underlying cause of the stone disease, a mainstay of conservative management is the forced increase in fluid intake to achieve a daily urine output of 2 liters. HYPERCALCIURIA: Dietary calcium restriction is not recommended for stone formers with nephrolithiasis. Diets with a calcium content ≥ 1 g/day (and low protein-low sodium) could be protective against the risk of stone formation in hypercalciuric stone forming adults. Moderate dietary salt restriction is useful in limiting urinary calcium excretion and thus may be helpful for primary and secondary prevention of nephrolithiasis. A low-normal protein intake decrease calciuria and could be useful in stone prevention and preservation of bone mass. Omega-3 fatty acids and bran of different origin decreases calciuria, but their impact on the urinary stone risk profile is uncertain. Sports beverage do not affect the urinary stone risk profile. HYPEROXALURIA: A diet low in oxalate and/or a calcium intake normal to high (800-1200 mg/day for adults) reduce the urinary excretion of oxalate, conversely a diet rich in oxalates and/or a diet low in calcium increase urinary oxalate. A restriction in protein intake may reduce the urinary excretion of oxalate although a vegetarian diet may lead to an increase in urinary oxalate. Adding bran to a diet low in oxalate cancels its effect of reducing urinary oxalate. Conversely, the addition of supplements of fruit and vegetables to a mixed diet does not involve an increased excretion of oxalate in the urine. The intake of pyridoxine reduces the excretion of oxalate. HYPERURICOSURIA: In patients with renal calcium stones the decrease of the urinary excretion of uric acid after restriction of dietary protein and purine is suggested although not clearly demonstrated. HYPOCITRATURIA: The administration of alkaline-citrates salts is recommended for the medical treatment of renal stone-formers with hypocitraturia, although compliance to this treatment is limited by gastrointestinal side effects and costs. Increased intake of fruit and vegetables (excluding those with high oxalate content) increases citrate excretion and involves a significant protection against the risk of stone formation. Citrus (lemons, oranges, grapefruit, and lime) and non citrus fruits (melon) are natural sources of dietary citrate, and several studies have shown the potential of these fruits and/or their juices in raising urine citrate levels. CHILDREN: There are enought basis to advice an adequate fluid intake also in children. Moderate dietary salt restriction and implementation of potassium intake are useful in limiting urinary calcium excretion whereas dietary calcium restriction is not recommended for children with nephrolithiasis. It seems reasonable to advice a balanced consumption of fruit and vegetables and a low consumption of chocolate and cola according to general nutritional guidelines, although no studies have assessed in pediatric stone formers the effect of fruit and vegetables supplementation on urinary citrate and the effects of chocolate and cola restriction on urinary oxalate in pediatric stone formers. Despite the low level of scientific evidence, a low-protein (< 20 g/day) low-salt (< 2 g/day) diet with high hydration (> 3 liters/day) is strongly advised in children with cystinuria. ELDERLY: In older patients dietary counseling for renal stone prevention has to consider some particular aspects of aging. A restriction of sodium intake in association with a higher intake of potassium, magnesium and citrate is advisable in order to reduce urinary risk factors for stone formation but also to prevent the loss of bone mass and the incidence of hypertension, although more hemodynamic sensitivity to sodium intake and decreased renal function of the elderly have to be considered. A diet rich in calcium (1200 mg/day) is useful to maintain skeletal wellness and to prevent kidney stones although an higher supplementation could involve an increase of risk for both the formation of kidney stones and cardiovascular diseases. A lower content of animal protein in association to an higher intake of plant products decrease the acid load and the excretion of uric acid has no particular contraindications in the elderly patients, although overall nutritional status has to be preserved.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating silodosin in the treatment of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic enlargement.

PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reporting the efficacy and safety of silodosin in the treatment of non-neurogenic male LUTS suggestive of benign prostatic enlargement. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A systematic review searching multiple dataset for the term "silodosin". A meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager software (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). RESULTS: Our systematic search retrieved four studies summarizing the data of five RCTs. Silodosin was more effective than placebo with regard to mean change in all the parameters related to the IPSS and Qmax (all p values <0.0003). Adverse events (AE), abnormal ejaculation (AEj), and withdrawal due to AE were all more common with silodosin (all p values <0.001). The prevalence of dizziness and adverse events other than AEj was similar with silodosin and placebo. Silodosin was more effective than tamsulosin 0.2 mg with regard to some IPSS-related parameters. [corrected] Silodosin and tamsulosin 0.4 mg were similarly effective in all the efficacy analyses. AEj was less common with tamsulosin 0.2 and 0.4 mg (p values <0.00001); adverse events other than AEj were more common with tamsulosin 0.2 and 0.4 mg (p values ≤ 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Silodosin was significantly more effective than placebo and tamsulosin 0.2 mg in improving symptoms and as effective as tamsulosin 0.4 mg. With regard to adverse events, AEj was more common with silodosin. All the adverse events other than AEj were significantly more common with tamsulosin 0.2 and 0.4 mg and as frequent with silodosin and placebo.

Diagnostic procedures by Italian general practitioners in response to lower urinary tract symptoms in male patients: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this prospective, multicentre, observational study was to evaluate the initial diagnostic procedures for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) carried out by Italian general practitioners (GPs). METHODS: Data were collected from 445 GPs in Italy regarding the initial clinical decisions and diagnostic procedures adopted for the management of 1399 male patients with LUTS aged >or= 50 years. RESULTS: 50.3% of patients were managed by the GP,4.9% were referred to the urologist immediately and 44.8% after carrying out some diagnostic procedures. A digital rectal examination was performed in only one-third of the patients, many of whom were not subsequently referred to the urologist (26.4%). Laboratory tests that are usually recommended (i.e. PSA, urinalysis and serum creatinine) were undertaken in 98.3% of patients, while tests that are generally considered optional (such as flowmetry) were undertaken in up to 64%. Other generally not recommended investigations, such as ultrasonography, were carried out in 77.2%. The mean time to diagnosis was significantly shorter when the urologist was not involved (36.0 days for GP only management vs 51.4 days for immediate referral and vs 43.4 days for delayed referral (p = 0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show a propensity for the majority of Italian GPs to deal with LUTS patients in a primary setting without immediate referral to the urologist. In principle, this trend could be beneficial for the patient (i.e. by reducing time to diagnosis) and cost saving for the national health system. However, the diagnostic procedures selected by the GPs were not in line with best evidence practice recommendations. Shared-care protocols involving both GPs and urologists may contribute to better implementation of the guidelines on the management of LUTS and benign prostatic hyperplasia in Italy.

Evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms related to uncomplicated benign prostatic hyperplasia in Italy: updated summary from AURO.it.

BACKGROUND: The first Italian national guidelines were developed by the Italian Association of Urologists and published in 2007. Since then, a number of new drugs or classes of drugs have emerged for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) related to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), new data have emerged on medical therapy (monotherapies and combination therapies), new surgical techniques have come into practice, and our understanding of disease pathogenesis has increased. Consequently, a new update of the guidelines has become necessary. METHODS: A structured literature review was conducted to identify relevant papers published between 1 August 2006 and 12 December 2010. Publications before or after this timeframe were considered only if they were recognised as important milestones in the field or if the literature search did not identify publications within this timeframe. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were determined according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. MAIN FINDINGS: Decisions on therapeutic intervention should be based on the impact of symptoms on quality of life (QoL) rather than the severity of symptoms (International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) score). A threshold for intervention was therefore based on the IPSS Q8, with intervention recommended for patients with a score of at least 4. Several differences in clinical recommendations have emerged. For example, combination therapy with a 5α-reductase inhibitor plus α blocker is now the recommended option for the treatment of patients at risk of BPH progression. Other differences include the warning of potential worsening of cognitive disturbances with use of anticholinergics in older patients, the distinction between Serenoa repens preparations (according to the method of extraction), and the clearly defined threshold of prostate size for performing open surgery (>80 g). While the recommendations included in these guidelines are evidence based, clinical decisions should also be informed by patients' clinical and physical circumstances, as well as patients' preferences and actions. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines are intended to assist physicians and patients in the decision-making process regarding the management of LUTS/BPH, and support the process of continuous improvement of the quality of care and services to patients.

Evidence-based guidelines for the management of lower urinary tract symptoms related to uncomplicated benign prostatic hyperplasia in Italy: updated summary.

BACKGROUND AND SCOPE: Despite the high prevalence and huge socio-economic impact of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in Italy, no national guidelines have been produced so far. This is a summary of the first Italian guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) related to uncomplicated BPH, prepared by a multidisciplinary panel under the auspices of the Italian Association of Urologists and introduced in Italy in 2003. An update compiled by the authors is also included. METHODS: Relevant papers published from 1998 to 2003 (updated to 2006) were identified through a structured literature review and the quality of evidence presented therein was graded according to the Centre for the Evaluation of Effectiveness in Health Administration (CeVEAS) system. Recommendations were based on evidence from the literature, but also on feedback from practitioners and specialists. MAIN FINDINGS/RECOMMENDATIONS: Given the prevalence of BPH, all men aged > or = 50 years of age should be asked about LUTS and informed about disease characteristics and therapeutic options, while sexual function should always be assessed in patients with severe and long-standing LUTS. Initial assessment should include medical history (including drug and co-morbidity history), digital rectal examination, urinalysis, International Prostate Symptom Score-Quality of Life (IPSS-QoL) and a voiding diary, while prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and measurement of prostate volume by suprapubic ultrasonography are indicated in fully informed patients with a life expectancy of > or = 10 years in whom BPH progression could influence treatment choices. QoL considerations should dictate whether to start active treatment. When QoL is not affected by LUTS, watchful waiting is indicated if symptoms are mild, acceptable if they are moderate. When QoL is affected, medical therapy with alpha1-blockers or 5alpha-reductase inhibitors (the latter indicated in patients with increased prostate volume) is appropriate. Combined therapy with alpha1-blockers + 5alpha-reductase inhibitors should only be considered in patients at high risk for progression (prostate volume > 40 mL or PSA > 4 ng/mL), since the incremental cost of combination therapy vs. monotherapy with alpha1-blockers or finasteride is prohibitive. Selection of the type of surgery should be based on the surgeon's experience, the presence of co-morbid conditions and the size of the prostate. Open prostatectomy and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) are recommended in patients with acute or chronic retention of urine, and acceptable in obstructed patients with moderate/severe symptoms and worsened QoL. Transurethral incision of the prostate (TUIP) is acceptable when prostate volume is < or = 30 mL. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) may be proposed to motivated patients where expert surgeons are available. Transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT) or transurethral needle ablation (TUNA) may be proposed to motivated patients who prefer to avoid surgery and/or do not respond to medical treatment. The possible effects of medical or surgical treatments on sexual function should always be discussed. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines are intended to provide a framework for health professionals involved in BPH management in order to facilitate decision-making in all areas and at all levels of healthcare.

Combined percutaneous-transurethral incision for treatment of ureterocele in adults.

We report our experience with a combined percutaneous-transurethral endoscopic incision in the treatment of ureterocele in 15 adult patients, a technique that enhances accuracy and has been associated with excellent functional results.

Effects of a shared protocol between urologists and general practitioners on referral patterns and initial diagnostic management of men with lower urinary tract symptoms in Italy: the Prostate Destination study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether adopting a shared protocol between urologists and general practitioners (GPs) might change diagnostic procedures and referral patterns in the management of men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Forty-five urological centres and 263 GPs in Italy participated in this prospective study. Procedures adopted by GPs for evaluating five consecutive patients (aged > or = 50 years) were compared before (phase 1) and after (phase 2) implementation of the shared protocol. An evidence-based diagnostic algorithm was developed and approved by participating urologists and presented to local GPs at a training session. Protocol modifications were allowed after discussion with GPs. Direct costs of diagnostic procedures carried out before and after implementing the protocol were calculated from the perspective of the national health service. RESULTS: In all, 903 patients were evaluable in phase 1 and 856 in phase 2. Implementation of the protocol did not change referral patterns, with about half the patients being managed entirely by GPs. The use of a digital rectal examination by GPs increased from 32% to 41%, use of transrectal and suprapubic ultrasonography decreased from 33% to 23% and 53% to 44%, respectively, (all P < 0.001) and use of the International Prostate Symptom Score increased from 4.5% to 23.1% (P < 0.001). Overall, protocol-recommended tests were used more frequently, while those not recommended decreased after implementing the protocol. However, overuse of the tests not recommended (i.e. urine culture and free/total prostate specific antigen ratio) remained high. The mean cost per patient of diagnostic procedures ordered by GPs decreased from Euros 71.82 to Euros 61.93, with Euros 9.9 saved for each patient. CONCLUSION: Our intervention failed to decrease the percentage of cases of LUTS being referred to specialists, but was moderately effective in inducing changes in the diagnostic management by GPs that were indicative of increased compliance with best-practice principles, and produced cost savings of 13.8%.