En Bloc enucleation with early apical release technique using MOSES (En Bloc MoLEP) vs. classic En Bloc HoLEP: a single arm study comparing intra- and postoperative outcomes.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We aimed to describe the technique and outcomes of En-Bloc MOSES laser enucleation of the prostate (En-Bloc MoLEP) with early apical release comparing it to En-Bloc HoLEP (non-MOSES). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a single-arm prospective study, using a historical control. n = 80 patients were enrolled to the En Bloc MoLEP group and compared to a retrospective group of n = 137 patients treated by En Bloc HoLEP (non-MOSES), in total n = 217 patients. RESULTS: En-Bloc MoLEP, showed to significantly improve the surgical time by 32% compared to non-MOSES HoLEP (32.16 ± 14.46 min, 47.58 ± 21.32, respectively; P = 0.003). Enucleation time, ablation rate and hemostasis time were also significantly improved (P < 0.001, for all three parameters). Enucleation time was 22.10 ± 9.27 min and 31.46 ± 14.85 min (P < 0.001), ablation rate 4.11 ± 2.41 and 2.54 ± 1.31 gr/min (P < 0.001), Hemostasis time 3.01 ± 2.50 and 8.35 ± 5.38 min (P < 0.001), for En Bloc MoLEP and En Bloc HoLEP, respectively. Q-max, PVR, PSA and IPSS showed significant improvement, however, at 12 months no significant differences were observed comparing both groups. CONCLUSIONS: En-Bloc MoLEP was significantly better than En-Bloc HoLEP in terms of surgical time, enucleation time, ablation rate and hemostasis time. However, large comparative RCT with long-term follow-up are needed.

Urinary and sexual function after treatment with temporary implantable nitinol device (iTind) in men with LUTS: 6-month interim results of the MT-06-study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the functional outcomes as they relate to the preservation of urinary continence and sexual function after treatment with the temporarily implanted nitinol device (iTind; Medi-Tate Ltd, Israel); a novel minimally invasive treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: Men with symptomatic BPH (IPSS ≥ 10, Qmax < 12 ml/s, and prostate volume (PV) < 120 ml) were invited to participate in this single-arm, prospective multicenter study (MT06). Patients were not washed out of BPH medications before the procedure. The iTind was implanted through a 22F rigid cystoscope under intravenous sedation and was removed 5-7 days later through a 22F Foley catheter under local anesthesia. Post-operative VAS and complications (Clavien Dindo-Grading System) were recorded. Preservation of urinary continence and erectile and ejaculatory function were assessed according to ISI, MSHQ-EjD and SHIM questionnaires. Post-operative IPSS, QoL, Qmax and PVR were also assessed at 1, 3, and 6 months post-operatively. RESULTS: This interim report includes data out to 6 months on the first 70 patients enrolled in the study. The median age was 62.31 years, and the mean prostate volume was 37.68 ml (15-80 ml). Baseline and follow-up data are reported in Table 1. No intraoperative complications were observed, the average post-operative VAS score was 3.24 ± 2.56. On average patients returned to daily life after 4.3 days following the retrieval procedure. Sexual function and urinary continence were preserved in all subjects according to the ISI, SHIM and MSHQ-EjD questionnaires and significant improvements (p < 0.0001) from baseline levels were recorded in IPSS, QoL and peak flow. CONCLUSION: iTind is a well-tolerated, minimally invasive treatment for BPH-related LUTS which preserves sexual function and urinary continence, offers a rapid recovery and return to daily life, and a significant improvement of symptoms and urinary flow at 6-month follow-up.

Robotic Repair of Ureteral Strictures: Techniques and Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide an overview and description of the different surgical techniques for the robotic repair of ureteral strictures. RECENT FINDINGS: The robotic repair of ureteral stenosis has emerged as a useful option for treating strictures unsuitable for endoscopic resolution with good results, lower morbidity, and faster recovery than open techniques. Depending on the stricture's length and location, the reconstructive options are reimplantation, psoas hitch, Boari flap, ureteroureterostomy, appendiceal onlay flap, buccal mucosa graft (BMG) ureteroplasty, ileal replacement, or renal autotransplantation. The robotic approach offers a magnified vision and the possibility of adding near-infrared fluorescence (NIRF) imaging, indocyanine green (ICG), and FireflyTM to facilitate the technique. Multicenter studies with extended follow-up still have to confirm the good results obtained in published case series. Robotic reconstructive techniques are useful for repairing ureteral strictures, obtaining good functional results with less morbidity and faster recovery than open procedures.

Retroperitoneal Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy (rRAPN): Surgical Technique and Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We aim to offer a description of the surgical technique and to review the current state retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (rRAPN). RECENT FINDINGS: Partial nephrectomy is the standard treatment for localized kidney tumours. rRAPN is especially useful for kidney tumours of posterior location. It offers advantages such as direct access to the renal artery and no need for bowel mobilization. The disadvantages are the small working space and the less familiar anatomical landmarks. It is a reproducible technique that achieves similar oncological and functional results to the more traditional transperitoneal route (tRAPN). High-quality randomized studies are needed to ascertain the role of new technologies as modern high-flow insufflation systems, intracavitary ultrasound, 3D planning, and augmented reality (AR), in the performance of this operation. rRAPN is especially useful for kidney tumours of posterior location. Robotic surgeons ideally should become familiar with both approaches, transperitoneal or retroperitoneal.

'En Bloc' HoLEP with early apical release in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia.

PURPOSE: HoLEP represents an excellent treatment option for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Recently, 'en bloc' techniques resulting in improved visualization, shorter surgical times, and easier recognition of the dissection plane have been described. In this paper we describe the 'En bloc' HoLEP technique with early apical release. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 2015 and March 2017, 137 consecutive patients were subjected to this technique by a single surgeon. The following parameters were measured pre- and post-procedure: International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum flow rate (Qmax), post-void residual urine (PVR) and PSA. Complications were recorded. RESULTS: Mean (SD; range) age was 66 years (8.0; 51-84), mean PSA was 4.8 ng/ml (7.0; 0.3-70), mean prostate volume was 75.63 ml (42.1; 37-253), mean volume of prostatic tissue removed was 65.9 ml (35.8; 30-217). Mean surgical duration was 47.58 min (21.3; 15-120 min): enucleation 31.5 min (14.9; 5-80 min), morcellating 6.9 min (6.6; 1-60 min). Mean hospitalization duration was 1.2 days (range 1-3), mean catheterization time was 1.2 days (range 1-5). The rate of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) was 5.8, 1.5 and 0.7% at 1, 3, and 6 months post-operation, respectively. Compared to pre-operative values, IPSS, Qmax, and PVR showed significant improvements at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months following the operation (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: 'En Bloc' HoLEP with early apical release is a safe technique that allows for easier recognition of the surgical plane and preserves the external sphincter's mucosa to provide low rates of post-operative stress incontinence and significant functional results.