Admission of patients with acute urinary retention leads to a definitive management decision.

BACKGROUND: Acute urinary retention (AUR) is a common urologic emergency. However, its management is not standardized due to lack of clinical guidelines. AIMS: We retrospectively reviewed the treatment of all male patients admitted to our institution with AUR over 12 months. METHODS: Data was obtained from the HIPE (Hospital Inpatient Enquiry) data system, each patient's electronic discharge summary and from patient medical records. RESULTS: There were 130 AUR admissions during the period. About 74 admissions were due to benign prostatic enlargement (BPE). Of these, 45.9% (n = 34) passed their trial without catheter (TWOC). The remainder (n = 40) failed their TWOC necessitating recatheterization and consideration for transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) or re-TWOC. An indwelling urinary catheter (IDC) was inserted for 27.5% (n = 11) of patients with a failed TWOC secondary to comorbidities. This group had a mean age of 78 years (range 68-96 years). Of those who failed their TWOC, 32.5% (n = 13) had a TURP on index admission. Of the remaining 16 patients with failed TWOC, 75% (n = 12) were discharged with an IDC and readmitted for an elective TURP with a median waiting time of 55 days (range 17-138 days). 18.75% (n = 3) passed a re-TWOC and thus offset the need to have any surgical intervention and 6.25% (n = 1) proceeded to a radical retropubic prostatectomy for biopsy proven prostate adenocarcinoma. CONCLUSION: Admission of patients with acute urinary retention leads to a definitive management decision and reduced prolonged catheterization.

Can we avoid surgery in elderly patients with renal masses by using the Charlson comorbidity index?

OBJECTIVE To determine the safety of surveillance for localized contrast-enhancing renal masses in elderly patients whose comorbidities precluded invasive management; to provide an insight into the natural history of small enhancing renal masses; and to aid the clinician in identifying those patients who are most suitable for a non-interventional approach. PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a retrospective chart review of 26 consecutive patients (16 men and 10 women), who were followed for > or =1 year, with localized solid enhancing renal masses between 1998 and 2006. These patients were unfit or unwilling to undergo radical or partial nephrectomy. None had their tumours surgically removed. Study variables included age, presentation, tumour size, growth rate, Charlson comorbidity index (CMI) and available pathological data. RESULTS The mean (range) patient age was 78.14 (63-89) year, with a mean follow-up of 28.1 (12-72) months. The mean tumour size was 4.25 (2.5-8.7) cm at diagnosis. The tumour growth rate was 0.44 cm/year; among smaller masses (T1a) it was 0.15 cm/year, vs 0.64 cm/year in the larger masses (T1b and T2). The mean CMI was 2.96. There were 11 deaths overall; 10 patients died from unrelated illnesses. One death was directly attributable to metastatic renal cancer; this patient had an initial tumour diameter of 5.4 cm and a CMI of 6. All patients who died had a CMI of > or =3. CONCLUSIONS Elderly patients with small renal tumours (T1a) and comorbidity scores of > or =3 were more likely to die as a result of their comorbidities rather than the renal tumour. Surveillance of small renal masses appears to be a safe alternative in elderly patients who are poor surgical candidates, where the overall growth rate appears to be slow.