Gel Rolls Increase Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Radiation Exposure.

Introduction: Despite increasing interest in reducing radiation doses during endoscopic stone surgery, there is conflicting evidence as to whether percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) positioning (prone or supine) impacts radiation. We observed clinically that a patient placed prone on gel rolls had higher than expected radiation with intraoperative CT imaging and that gel rolls were visible on the coaxial imaging. We hypothesized that gel rolls directly increase radiation doses. Methods: Anthropomorphic experiments to simulate PCNL positions were performed using a robotic multiplanar fluoroscopy system (Artis Zeego Care+Clear, Siemens) and a 5-second coaxial imaging protocol (5s BODY). A fluoroscopy phantom was placed in various positions, including prone on a gel roll; prone on blankets of equal thickness; prone and supine directly on the table; and modified supine (MS) positions using a thin gel roll or rolled blanket. Impacts of C-arm direction and use of a 1 L saline bag were also evaluated. Measured dose area product (DAP) was compared for the groups. Results: Measured DAP was found to increase by 146 µGy*m2 (287%) when prone on gel rolls compared with only 62.29 (23%) when placed on blankets of equal thickness, although the model likely both overstates the relative impact and understates the absolute impact that would be seen clinically. Measured DAP between experimental groups also varied considerably despite fluoroscopy time being held constant. Conclusions: Our experiments support our hypothesis that gel rolls directly increase radiation dose, which has not been previously reported, using an anthropomorphic model. Surgeons should consider radiolucent materials for positioning to limit radiation exposure to patients and the surgical team.

Association of Frailty and Complications Following Prostate Biopsy: Results From a Population-Based, Privately Insured Cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Prostate needle biopsy (PNBx) is essential for prostate cancer diagnosis, yet it is not without risks. We sought to assess patients who underwent PNBx using a claims-based frailty index to study the association between frailty and postbiopsy complications from a large population-based cohort. We hypothesized that increased frailty would be associated with adverse outcomes. METHODS: Using Market Scan, we identified all men who underwent PNBx from 2010 to 2015. Individuals were stratified by claims-based frailty index into 2 prespecified categories: not frail, frail. Complications occurring within 30 days from prostate biopsy requiring emergency department, clinic, or hospital evaluations constituted the primary outcome. Unadjusted and adjusted analyses identified patient covariates associated with complications. RESULTS: We identified 193,490 patients who underwent PNBx. The mean age was 57.6 years (SD: 5.0). In all, 5% were prefrail, mildly frail, or moderately to severely frail. The rate of overall complications increased from 11.1% for not frail to 15.5% for frail men. After adjusting for covariates, individuals with any degree of frailty experienced a higher risk of overall complication (odds ratio [OR]: 1.29; P < .001), clinic (OR: 1.26; P < .001) and emergency department visits (OR: 1.32; P = .02), and hospital readmissions (OR: 1.41; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty was associated with a higher risk of complications for patients undergoing PNBx. Frailty assessment should be integrated into shared decision-making to limit the provision of potentially harmful care associated with prostate cancer screening.