Bicentric prospective evaluation of corporoplasty with porcine small intestinal submucosa (SIS) in patients with severe Peyronie's disease.

INTRODUCTION: Advanced Peyronie's disease (PD) with severe penile deviation demands grafting procedures following plaque incision or partial plaque excision in order to avoid penile shortening and to improve quality of life of affected patients. Small intestinal submucosa (SIS) is an established xenograft. The objective of the present study was to validate external results in a bicentric prospective manner. METHODS: Patient selection criteria, surgical technique and standards for pre- and postoperative care were defined. Consecutively, patients with severe penile deviation in stable disease and sufficient erectile function were included between 2007 and 2015. After plaque incision, grafting was performed using SIS in a standardized manner. The postoperative evaluation using a non-validated questionnaire included complications, correction of curvature, pre- and postoperative erectile function, change in penile length and general satisfaction with the procedure. RESULTS: Forty-three patients underwent surgery between 2007 and 2015. The mean degree of preoperative curvature was 73.8° (range 60-90°). No intraoperative or major postoperative complications were reported. After a mean follow-up of 33.0 months (range 10-59), complete straightening of the penis was achieved in 74.4%. 88.4% of all patients were able to achieve satisfying sexual intercourse (67.4% unaided, 21.0% with assistance). The IIEF-5 score was improved in 69.8% (mean improvement 4.0 points). Overall 86.0% were satisfied with the surgical treatment. CONCLUSION: Corporoplasty with SIS in patients with PD and severe penile curvature is a safe approach and shows good long-term results. A thorough patient selection and a standardized pre-, intra- and postoperative procedure are decisive for a satisfying outcome.

Miniaturized percutaneous Nephrolithotomy without antibiotic prophylaxis: a single institution experience.

PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility of sparing routine antibiotic prophylaxis in patients without preoperative urinary tract infection (UTI) undergoing a miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective, monocentric study was conducted to evaluate the outcome of a modified perioperative antibiotic management strategy according to the principles of antibiotic stewardship (ABS). From December 2015 patients undergoing mPCNL for kidney stone with preoperative unremarkable urine culture no longer received an antibiotic prophylaxis (NoPAP). The NoPAP group was compared to mPCNL patients who received standard antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) in the two years before. Analysis focused on postoperative complications. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify potential risk factors. RESULTS: Postoperative fever occurred in 8% of the NoPAP and 9% of the PAP patients (p = 0.764). Clavien 1-3 complications did not differ between groups with 33% in the NoPAP and 41% in the PAP (p = 0.511). No Clavien 4-5 complications were seen. A (partial) staghorn stone (HR 5.587; p = 0.019) and an infectious stone component (HR 6.313; p = 0.003) were identified as significant risk factors for postoperative fever. By sparing routine antibiotic prophylaxis the overall antibiotic usage was reduced from 100% (PAP) to 9% (NoPAP). CONCLUSION: Patients with negative preoperative UC, a none-staghorn stone and no history of recurrent UTI or infectious stones may not need routine antibiotic prophylaxis prior to mPCNL. A prospective validation is warranted.

[What is the perception of the 10-point plan of the German Federal Ministry of Health against multidrug-resistant pathogens and measures of antibiotic stewardship? : An interdisciplinary analysis among German clinicians and development of a decision tool for urologists]. / Wie werden der 10-Punkte-Plan des Deutschen Bundesministeriums für Gesundheit zur Bekämpfung resistenter Erreger und Maßnahmen des Antibiotic Stewardship wahrgenommen? : Eine fachübergreifende Analyse der Kenntnis deutscher Klinikärzte und Entwicklung einer urologischen Handlungsanweisung.

BACKGROUND: Due to increasing antibiotic resistances, relevant treatment problems are currently emerging in clinical practice. In March 2015, the German Federal Ministry of Health (BMG) published a 10-point plan designed to combat this development. Furthermore, the first German guideline on antibiotic stewardship (ABS) was implemented in 2013 and instructs physicians of different specialties about several treatment considerations. Evidence is scarce on how such concepts (10-point plan/BMG, ABS) are perceived among clinicians. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Within the MR2 study (Multiinstitutional Reconnaissance of practice with MultiResistant bacteria - a survey focusing on German hospitals), a questionnaire including 4 + 35 items was sent to 18 German hospitals between August and October 2015, surveying internists, gynecologists, general surgeons, and urologists. Using multivariate logistic regression models (MLRM), the impact of medical specialty and further criteria on the endpoints (1) awareness of the 10-point plan/BMG and (2) knowledge of ABS measures were assessed. Fulfillment of endpoints was predefined when average or full knowledge was reported (reference: poor to no knowledge). RESULTS: Overall response rate was 43% (456/1061) for fully evaluable questionnaires. Only 63.0 and 53.6% of urologists and nonurologists (internists, gynecologists, and general surgeons), respectively, attended training courses regarding multidrug-resistance or antibiotic prescribing in the 12 months prior to the study (P = 0.045). The endpoints average and full knowledge regarding 10-point plan/BMG and ABS measures were fulfilled in only 31.4 and 32.8%, respectively. In MLRM, clinicians with at least one previous training course (reference: no training course) were 2.5- and 3.8-fold more likely to meet respective endpoint criteria (all P < 0.001). Medical specialty (urologists vs. nonurologists) did not significantly impact the endpoints in both MLRM. CONCLUSIONS: The 10-point plan/BMG and ABS programs should be implemented into clinical practice, but awareness and knowledge of both is insufficient. Thus, it stands to reason that the actual realization of such measures is inadequate and continuous training towards rational prescription of antibiotics is necessary, regardless of medical specialty.

[Antibiotic stewardship (ABS). Definition, contents, necessity and practice on examples of current clinical-urological controversies]. / Antibiotic Stewardship (ABS). Definition, Inhalte, Notwendigkeit und Umsetzung an Beispielen aktueller klinisch-urologischer Kontroversen.

BACKGROUND: Infectious diseases caused by multi-resistant pathogens are increasing worldwide and are posing a challenge to German urology as well. Furthermore, there is a limited perspective of new antibiotic developments. One way out of this dilemma is a differentiated handling and use of antibiotics (antibiotic stewardship, ABS). AIM: The aim of this review is to identify key issues in modern urological antibiotic therapy, which can be considered as exemplary for the whole topic of ABS. This includes a review of the current data of the individual topics, including thought-provoking impulse for future clinical application and research. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The research group "infectious diseases" of GeSRU Academics identified the following central topics: excessive use of fluoroquinolones, diagnosis and treatment of urethritis and perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis. Subsequently, we performed a literature research in MEDLINE to uncover controversies and open questions of the individual topics within the meaning of ABS. RESULTS: The analysis of modern antibiotic therapy in urology shows numerous open questions in all quality dimensions of ABS: structural quality (e.g. through improved training of medical staff in the differentiated use of antibiotics), process quality (e.g. by improved adherence to existing infectiological guidelines, here in particular the perioperative prophylaxis and therapy of urethritis) and outcome (e.g. by detection of resistance rates and infection rates). DISCUSSION: The overarching and common goal is to avoid a post-antibiotic era. ABS programmes and a 10-point plan of the federal government are considered positive political developments in this area but do not release the individual urologist from a personal responsibility as part of his daily routine. A critical analysis of the topic "antibiotic treatment" is essential.

[What do prostate cancer patients know about smoking? : Results of a bicentric questionnaire study (KRAUT study)]. / Was wissen Patienten mit einem Prostatakarzinom über das Rauchen? : Ergebnisse einer bizentrischen Fragebogenstudie (KRAUT-Studie).

BACKGROUND: According to the results of a recent meta-analysis, cancer-specific mortality of prostate cancer (PCA) patients is enhanced by 24 % in case of a positive smoking history with a dose-dependent impact of smoking. Until now it is unknown whether this information actually reaches the patients and how extensively an informational discussion about this topic is pursued by physicians. OBJECTIVE: Three study hypotheses were defined: (1) the knowledge of PCA patients about the potential relationship between tumor progression and cigarette consumption is low, (2) only in rare cases has a clear statement been provided by treating physicians including the explicit advice to stop smoking, and (3) there was a direct association between tumor stage and the extent of cigarette consumption. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire comprising 23 items was developed and validated with 25 uro-oncological patients prior to study start. Between September 2013 and December 2014 a total of 124 PCA patients (median age 65 years) from two urology departments were included in this questionnaire-based survey. RESULTS: The study population comprised 43 % (n = 54), 39 % (n = 48), and 18 % (n = 22) nonsmokers, former smokers and active smokers, respectively. Active and former smokers differed insignificantly in the number of pack-years only (24.8 vs. 23.7 years, p = 0.995). Of the patients, 56 % regarded an influence of cigarette consumption on the PCA-specific prognosis as possible. However, because a significant (p < 0.001) number of patients wrongly suspected smoking to be causative for PCA development, their knowledge about PCA prognosis is supposedly not based on adequate knowledge. Two of 22 active smokers (9.1 %), 5 of 48 former smokers (10.4 %), and 2 of 54 nonsmokers (3.7 %) had an informational discussion with their urologist about the association of cigarette consumption and PCA-related prognosis (a further 9.1, 4.2 and 3.7 %, respectively, received this information solely from other medical specialties). Only 1 of 22 active smokers (4.5 %) was offered medical aids for smoking cessation by the general practitioner; none of the patients received such support by an urologist. There was no association between a positive smoking history or number of pack-years and PCA tumor stage. CONCLUSIONS: Education of PCA patients about the relationship between cigarette consumption and cancer-related prognosis is currently inadequate. Following the latest findings on this topic, urologists should pursue informational discussions with their patients, thereby strengthening their position as the primary contact person for decision making in PCA management.