European Association of Urology Guidelines on Urological Infections: Summary of the 2024 Guidelines.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Urological infections significantly impact the wellbeing and quality of life of individuals owing to their widespread occurrence and diverse clinical manifestations. The objective of the guidelines panel was to provide evidence-based guidance on the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of urinary tract infections (UTIs) and male accessory-gland infections, while addressing crucial public health aspects related to infection control and antimicrobial stewardship. METHODS: For the 2024 guidelines on urological infections, new and relevant evidence was identified, collated, and appraised via a structured assessment of the literature. Databases searched included Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Libraries. Recommendations within the guidelines were developed by the panel to prioritise clinically important care decisions. The strength of each recommendation was determined according to a balance between desirable and undesirable consequences of alternative management strategies, the quality of the evidence (including the certainty of estimates), and the nature and variability of patient values and preferences. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Key recommendations emphasise the importance of a thorough medical history and physical examination for patients with urological infections. The guidelines stress the role of antimicrobial stewardship to combat the rising threat of antimicrobial resistance, providing recommendations for antibiotic selection, dosing, and duration on the basis of the latest evidence. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: This overview of the 2024 EAU guidelines offers valuable insights into managing urological infections and are designed for effective integration into clinical practice. PATIENT SUMMARY: The European Association of Urology has issued an updated guideline on urological infections. The guidelines provide recommendations for diagnosis, treatment, and prevention, with a particular focus on minimising antibiotic use because of the increasing global threat of antimicrobial resistance.

Asymptomatic Bacteriuria and Urological Surgery: Risk Factor or Not? Results from the National and Multicenter TOCUS Database.

PURPOSE: Current guidelines recommend screening and treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria prior to all urological surgeries breaching the mucosa. But few evidence is supporting this recommendation. At least, risk stratification for postoperative urinary tract infection to support this strategy is lacking. The aim of this study was to define the associated factors for postoperative febrile infectious complications (urinary tract infection or surgical site infection) in urological surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, multicentric study including all consecutive patients undergoing any urological surgery with preoperative urine culture. The primary outcome was the occurrence of a urinary tract infection or surgical site infection occurring within 30 days after surgery. RESULTS: rom 2016 to 2023, in 10 centers, 2389 patients were included with 838 (35%) positive urine cultures (mono/bi/polymicrobial). Postoperative infections occurred in 106 cases (4.4%), of which 44 had negative urine cultures (41%), 42 had a positive mono/bi-microbial urine cultures (40%) and 20 had a polymicrobial urine cultures (19%). In multivariable analysis, urinary tract infections during the previous 12 months of surgery (OR 3.43; CI 95 2.07-5.66; P < .001), monomicrobial/bimicrobial preoperative urine culture (OR 3.68; CI 95 1.57-8.42; P 0.02), polymicrobial preoperative urine culture (OR 2.85; CI 95 1.52-5.14; P < .001), operative time (OR 1.09; CI 95 1.04-1.15; P < .001) were independent associated factors for postoperative febrile infections. CONCLUSIONS: Positive urine culture, including preoperative polymicrobial urine culture, prior to urological surgery was associated with postoperative infection. Additionally, patients experiencing infectious complications also had a higher incidence of other complications. The effectiveness of systematic preventive antibiotic therapy for a positive urine culture has not been conclusively established.

Urosepsis 30-day mortality, morbidity, and their risk factors: SERPENS study, a prospective, observational multi-center study.

PURPOSE: To provide a descriptive report of mortality and morbidity in the first 30 days of diagnosis of urosepsis. Secondary aim is to identify risk factors of unfavourable outcomes. METHODS: Prospective observational multicentre cohort study conducted from September 2014 to November 2018 in European hospitals. Adult patients (≥ 18 years) diagnosed with acute urosepsis according to Sepsis-2 criteria with confirmed microbiological infection were included. Outcomes were classified in one of four health states: death, multiple organ failure, single organ failure, and recovery at day 30 from onset of urosepsis. Descriptive statistics and ordinal logistic regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty four patients were recruited, and 30-day mortality rate was 2.8%, rising to 4.6% for severe sepsis. All patients who died had a SOFA score of ≥ 2 at diagnosis. Upon initial diagnosis, 79% (n = 281) of patients presented with OF. Within 30 days, an additional 5% developed OF, resulting in a total of 84% affected. Charlson score (OR 1.14 CI 1.01-1.28), patients with respiratory failure at baseline (OR 2.35, CI 1.32-4.21), ICU admission within the past 12 months (OR 2.05, CI 1.00-4.19), obstruction causative of urosepsis (OR 1.76, CI 1.02-3.05), urosepsis with multi-drug-resistant(MDR) pathogens (OR 2.01, CI 1.15-3.53), and SOFA baseline score ≥ 2 (OR 2.74, CI 1.49-5.07) are significantly associated with day 30 outcomes (OF and death). CONCLUSIONS: Impact of comorbidities and MDR pathogens on outcomes highlights the existence of a distinct group of patients who are prone to mortality and morbidity. These findings underscore the need for the development of pragmatic classifications to better assess the severity of UTIs and guide management strategies. STUDY REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov registration number NCT02380170.

Open versus robotic partial nephrectomy in obese patients: a multi-institutional propensity score-matched analysis (UroCCR 43-Robese study).

INTRODUCTION: There is limited evidence on the outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) and open partial nephrectomy (OPN) in obese patients (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2). In this study, we aimed to compare perioperative and oncological outcomes of RPN and OPN. METHODS: We relied on data from patients who underwent PN from 2009 to 2017 at 16 departments of urology participating in the UroCCR network, which were collected prospectively. In an effort to adjust for potential confounders, a propensity-score matching was performed. Perioperative outcomes were compared between OPN and RPN patients. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS: Overall, 1277 obese patients (932 robotic and 345 open were included. After propensity score matching, 166 OPN and 166 RPN individuals were considered for the study purposes; no statistically significant difference among baseline demographic or tumor-specific characteristics was present. A higher overall complication rate and major complications rate were recorded in the OPN group (37 vs. 25%, p = 0.01 and 21 vs. 10%, p = 0.007; respectively). The length of stay was also significantly longer in the OPN group, before and after propensity-score matching (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in Warm ischemia time (p = 0.66), absolute change in eGFR (p = 0.45) and positive surgical margins (p = 0.12). At a median postoperative follow-up period of 24 (8-40) months, DFS and OS were similar in the two groups (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, RPN was associated with better perioperative outcomes (improvement of major complications rate and LOS) than OPN. The oncological outcomes were found to be similar between the two approaches.

The Impact of Histological Variants on Oncological Outcomes After Surgical Resection of a Nonmetastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma with Tumor Thrombus: A Multi-institutional Study.

Background: There is no definitive evidence of the prognosis impact of histological variants (HVs) in patients who undergo surgical resection of a nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma (nm-RCC) with venous tumor thrombus (TT). Objective: To investigate the impact of HVs on the prognosis of patients with nm-RCC with TT after radical surgery. Design setting and participants: Patients who underwent radical nephrectomy with the removal of the venous TT for an nm-RCC were included in a retrospective study. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Three groups were identified: clear cell (ccRCC), papillary (pRCC), and chromophobe (chRCC) RCC. The primary outcome measures (disease-free and overall survival [OS]) were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to study the impact of HVs on survival. Results and limitations: A total of 873 patients were included. The histological subtypes were distributed as follows: ccRCC in 780 cases, pRCC in 58 cases, and chRCC in 35 cases. At the time of data analysis, 612 patients were recurrence free and 228 had died. A survival analysis revealed significant differences in both OS and recurrence-free survival across histological subtypes, with the poorest outcomes observed in pRCC patients (p < 0.05). In a multivariable analysis, pRCC was independently associated with worse disease-free survival and OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.71; p = 0.01 and HR: 1.24; p = 0.04), while chRCC was associated with more favorable outcomes than ccRCC (HR: 0.05; p < 0.001 and HR: 0.02; p < 0.001). A limitation of the study is its retrospective nature. Conclusions: In this multicentric series, HVs appeared to impact the medium-term oncological prognosis of kidney cancer with TT. Patient summary: This study investigated the differences in oncological outcomes among histological variants (clear cell, papillary, and chromophobe) in a cohort of nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma patients with venous tumor thrombus extension. We observed that these histological variants within this specific subgroup exhibit distinct outcomes, with papillary renal cell carcinoma being associated with the worst prognosis.

Asymptomatic bacteriuria prior to partial and radical nephrectomy: To screen or not to screen? Results from the national and multicenter TOCUS database.

INTRODUCTION: In the era of increased bacterial resistance, the main strategy is to reduce the prescription of antibiotics when possible. Nowadays, it is highly recommended to screen for asymptomatic bacteriuria (ABU), prior to urological surgery with potential mucosal breach or urine exposure. Screening and treating urinary colonization is a strategy widely adopted before radical and partial nephrectomy but without any evidence. Our main end point in this study is to analyze the relationship between preoperative urine culture and the risk of postoperative febrile urinary tract infection (UTI) or surgical-site infection (SSI) in partial or radical nephrectomy patients. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study between January 2016 and January 2023 in 11 French tertiary referral hospitals (TOCUS database). We collected the data for 269 patients including several pre-, intra-, and post-operative variables that could potentially increase the risk of postoperative UTI and SSI including preoperative urinary culture results. RESULTS: The incidence rate of postoperative UTI and SSI was 8.9% in our study. After conducting a logistic multivariate analysis, a propensity score matching analysis, and a subgroup analysis, we found no significant correlation between the urine culture and the postoperative UTI risk [OR = 1.2 (0.5-2.7) (p = 0.7)]. Only the postoperative non-infectious complications were related to a higher risk of postoperative UTI [OR = 12 (4-37), p < 0.001)]. CONCLUSION: Our research shows that screening and treating for ABU prior to radical or partial nephrectomy seems to be unnecessary to prevent postoperative UTI and SSI.

Corrigendum to "RPN (Radius, Position of tumour, iNvasion of renal sinus) Classification and Nephrometry Scoring System: An Internationally Developed Clinical Classification To Describe the Surgical Difficulty for Renal Masses for Which Robotic Partial Nephrectomy Is Planned" [Eur. Urol. Open Sci. 54 (2023) 33-42].

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.05.007.].

Primary implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter using the perineal and penoscrotal approaches: Functional results and assessment of reoperative procedures.

INTRODUCTION: Artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is the standard treatment for severe stress urinary incontinence in men. While the perineal access is considered the gold standard, some authors have proposed penoscrotal AUS in order to facilitate the procedure. The main objective of our study was to evaluate the duration of survival without revision surgery (SSRC) according to the surgical approach for primary implantation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data from 1179 patients implanted in France between 1991 and 2020 with an AMS 800 AUS were retrospectively analyzed. A total of 762 men were implanted perineally (VP) and 417 penoscrotally (VPS). RESULTS: Median follow-up was 20 vs. 25months respectively. The groups were equivalent overall, apart from the use of anticoagulants (11% VP vs. 6.3% VPS P=0.014). In our population, 54% patients were considered as "dry" in the case of VPS vs. 42% for VP. There was no significant difference in terms of survival time without reoperation, revision, replacement or explantation. In univariate and multivariate analysis, age over 70years was predictive of more reinterventions, whereas the use of a 4.5cm cuff was protective, with hazard ratios of 1.42 (P=0.001) and 0.78 (P=0.04), respectively. CONCLUSION: The penoscrotal approach does not appear to be associated with more complications, has good functional results and no significant difference in reoperation-free survival. A prospective multicenter non-inferiority study could be of interest to confirm our findings.

Genitourinary Tuberculosis: A Brief Manual for Urologists on Diagnosis and Treatment from the European Association of Urology Urological Infections Panel.

Although tuberculosis (TB) ranks among the most frequent infectious diseases worldwide, one of its extrapulmonary (EP) manifestations, genitourinary (GU) TB, is often underestimated by urologists, particularly in areas such as Europe where TB is not endemic. The aim of this review is to give urologists a concise overview of GUTB as a supplement to the more comprehensive European Association of Urology 2023 update on urological infections guidelines. EPTB can develop in 16% of TB cases. GUTB accounts for 4.6% of EPTB and is often asymptomatic or nonspecific, so it can be confused with other urogenital diseases. GUTB can be highly destructive, leading to failure of urogenital organs. Diagnosis is via microbiological, molecular, and histological testing for urine, genital secretions, or genitourinary tissue, supported by imaging. A 6-mo combinational medical regimen is the first-line treatment for GUTB. However, surgical interventions are also frequently required for the treatment of GUTB complications. Therefore, it is important to keep GUTB in mind for differential diagnosis. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed scientific studies on the occurrence, diagnosis, and treatment of tuberculosis in the genitourinary tract. Our aim is to raise awareness among urologists from countries where this disease does not occur frequently, as urogenital tuberculosis can occur without any symptoms or with unspecific symptoms that can be confused with other diseases.

Which revision strategy is the best for non-mechanical failure of male artificial urinary sphincter?

PURPOSE: Persistence or recurrence of stress urinary incontinence (prSUI) after artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation may be secondary to non-mechanical failure (NOMECA). It have for long been assumed to result from urethral atrophy. Its existence is now debated. As the pathophysiology of NOMECA is not elucidated, the most appropriate management remains unclear. We aimed to compare the several revision techniques for NOMECA of AUS in men. METHODS: NOMECA was defined as prSUI, with normally functioning device, no erosion, infection or fluid loss. Exclusion criteria were neurogenic SUI, revision or explantation for other causes. From 1991 to 2022, 143 AUS revisions for NOMECA, including 99 cuff DOWNSIZING, 10 cuff repositioning (RELOC), 13 TANDEM-CUFF placement, 18 cuff changing (CHANGE), three increasing balloon pressure (BALLOON-UP), were performed in 10 centers. BALLOON-UP patients weren't included in comparative analysis due to small sample size. All components could be changed during the revision. Patients were also categorized in COMPLETE-CHANGE vs. PARTIAL-CHANGE of the device. RESULTS: The three-months complete continence rate was 70.8% with a significant difference between RELOC and DOWNSIZING groups (p = 0.04). COMPLETE CHANGE was significantly associated with complete continence status at three months in multivariate analysis (83.3% vs. 63.3%, OR = 2.7; CI 95% [1.1-7.1], p = 0.03). Estimated five-year reoperation-free and explantation-free survival were respectively 63.4% and 75.9% (p = 0.16; p = 0.30). Those were significantly longer in COMPLETE-CHANGE vs PARTIAL-CHANGE (82.2% vs. 69.6%, p = 0.03); (71.2% vs. 58.2%, p = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS: AUS revision for prSUI due to NOMECA yields satisfactory outcomes regardless of the technique used. We observed better functional outcomes when repositioning the new cuff. COMPLETE-CHANGE may improve functional outcomes, explantation-free and reoperation-free survivals.

Can Simplified PADUA Renal (SPARE) Nephrometry scoring system help predict renal function outcomes after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy? (UroCCR study 93).

BACKGROUND: The SPARE Nephrometry Score (NS) is described as easier to implement than the RENAL and PADUA NSs, currently more widely used. Our objective was to compare the accuracy of SPARE NS in predicting renal function outcomes following RAPN. METHODS: A multicentric retrospective study was conducted using French kidney cancer network (UroCCR, NCT03293563) database. All patients included had RAPN for cT1 renal tumors between May 2010 and March 2021. SPARE was compared to RENAL, PADUA and Tumor Size to predict postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI), chronic kidney disease (CKD) upstaging, de novo CKD at 3-6 months follow-up and Trifecta failure. The ability of the different NSs and tumor size to predict renal function outcomes was evaluated using uni- and multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: According to our study criteria, 1171 patients were included. Mean preoperative tumor size and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were 3.4±1.4 cm and 85.8 mL/min/1.73 m2. In total, 266 (22.7%), 87 (7.4%), 94 (8%), and 624 (53.3%) patients had AKI, de novo CKD, CKD upstaging, and Trifecta failure, respectively. In multivariate analysis, all three NSs and tumor size were independent predictors of AKI, CKD de novo, CKD upgrade and Trifecta failure. There was no significant difference between all three NS and tumor sizes in predicting renal function outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: SPARE Score seems to be a valid alternative to predict renal function outcomes after RAPN. Nevertheless, in our study, tumor size was as accurate as NSs in predicting postoperative outcomes and, therefore, seems to be the logical choice for surgical decisions.

Standardized technique for ejaculation preservation during prostatic endoscopic ablative surgery.

PURPOSE: Ejaculatory dysfunction is the most common side effect of benign prostatic hyperplasia surgery. Modified techniques have emerged with the aim of preserving antegrade ejaculation without compromising obstruction relief. None are standardized or validated. The PARTURP study is a randomized study investigating partial versus complete prostate resection. We conducted an investigator consensus meeting to define the ideal surgical technique to achieve both correct obstruction relief with ejaculation preservation. METHODS: An expert consensus meeting involving all investigators of the PARTURP study took place to define a common technique using the nominal group methodology. The objectives were to define the areas to be resected and the areas to be preserved; to define the criteria for proper obstruction relief; to define the criteria for proper ejaculation preservation. RESULTS: All investigators (n = 15) attended the consensus meeting, and agreement between all the participants was obtained. The anatomical landmarks to be preserved are located around the verumontanum and along the posterior part of the prostatic urethra. These structures must be preserved up to 2 cm from the verumontanum. The participants agreed on the need to preserve the urethral mucosa in all the areas to be preserved and to reach the enucleation plane in the areas of resection. CONCLUSIONS: Anatomical landmarks for ejaculation-sparing surgery have been defined by the investigators of the PARTURP randomized study. These landmarks will be used during the study, and the clinical outcomes of this ejaculation-sparing technique will be compared with complete resection with up to 3 years follow-up.

Factors associated with urinary diversion and fatality of hospitalised acute pyelonephritis patients in France: a national cross-sectional study (FUrTIHF-2).

Acute pyelonephritis (AP) epidemiology has been sparsely described. This study aimed to describe the evolution of AP patients hospitalised in France and identify the factors associated with urinary diversion and fatality, in a cross-sectional study over the 2014-2019 period. Adult patients hospitalised for AP were selected by algorithms of ICD-10 codes (PPV 90.1%) and urinary diversion procedure codes (PPV 100%). 527,671 AP patients were included (76.5% female: mean age 66.1, 48.0% Escherichia coli), with 5.9% of hospital deaths. In 2019, the AP incidence was 19.2/10,000, slightly increasing over the period (17.3/10,000 in 2014). 69,313 urinary diversions (13.1%) were performed (fatality rate 6.7%), mainly in males, increasing over the period (11.7% to 14.9%). Urolithiasis (OR [95% CI] =33.1 [32.3-34.0]), sepsis (1.73 [1.69-1.77]) and a Charlson index ≥3 (1.32 [1.29-1.35]) were significantly associated with urinary diversion, whereas E. coli (0.75 [0.74-0.77]) was less likely associated. The same factors were significantly associated with fatality, plus old age and cancer (2.38 [2.32-2.45]). This nationwide study showed an increase in urolithiasis and identified, for the first time, factors associated with urinary diversion in AP along with death risk factors, which may aid urologists in clinical decision-making.

A comparison of perioperative outcomes of transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a systematic review.

RAPN can be carried out via a transperitoneal or retroperitoneal approach. The choice between the two approaches is open to debate and usually based on surgeon preference. The perioperative outcomes of transperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy versus retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy were compared. A systematic review of the literature was performed up to May 2020, using PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus and Ovid databases. Articles were selected according to a search strategy based on PRISMA criteria. Only studies comparing TRAPN with RRAPN were eligible for inclusion. Eleven studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. Baseline demographics (age, BMI, ASA, tumour size, and RENAL nephrometry score), intraoperative data (operative time, estimated blood loss, and warm ischaemia time) and postoperative outcomes (major complications according to Clavien-Dindo, length of hospital stay (LOS) and positive surgical margin rate) were recorded. A total of 3139 patients were included (2052 TRAPN vs. 1087 RRAPN). There was no significant difference in demographic variables (age, BMI), tumour size (p = 0.06) nor the nephrometry score (p = 0.20) between the two groups. Operative time (p = 0.02), estimated blood loss (p < 0.00001) and LOS (p < 0.00001) were significantly lower in the RRAPN group. No differences were found in major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo > 3; p = 0.37), warm ischaemia time (p = 0.37) or positive surgical margins (p = 0.13). Future researchers must attempt to achieve adequately powered, expertise based, multi-surgeon and multi-centric studies comparing TRAPN and RRAPN. RRAPN gives similar outcomes to TRAPN. RRAPN is associated with reduced operative time and LOS. Ideally, surgeons should be familiar and competent in both RAPN approaches and adopt a risk-stratified and patient-centred individualised approach, dependent on the tumour and patient characteristics. RAPN is feasible via two approaches. The retroperitoneal approach seems to be associated with a shorter operation time and hospital stay.

Clinical trial protocol for P-NeLoP: a randomized controlled trial comparing the feasibility and outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy with low insufflation pressure using AirSeal versus standard insufflation pressure (UroCCR no. 85 study).

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) is the standard of care for small, localized kidney tumors. This surgery is conducted within a short hospital stay and can even be performed as outpatient surgery in selected patients. In order to allow early rehabilitation of patients, an optimal control of postoperative pain is necessary. High-pressure pneumoperitoneum during surgery seems to be the source of significant pain during the first hours postoperatively. Our study is a prospective, randomized, multicenter, controlled study which aims to compare post-operative pain at 24 h between patients undergoing RAPN at low insufflation pressure (7 mmHg) and those operated on at standard pressure (12 mmHg) using the AirSeal system.This trial is registered in the US National Library of Medicine Trial Registry (NCT number: NCT05404685).

Retroperitoneal vs. transperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy: a multicenter propensity-score matching analysis (PADORA Study - UroCCR n° 68).

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy can be performed through either a transperitoneal or retroperitoneal approach. This study aimed to compare the rate of trifecta achievement between retroperitoneal (RRPN) and transperitoneal (TRPN) robot-assisted partial nephrectomy using a large multicenter prospectively-maintained database and propensity-score matching analysis. METHODS: This study was launched by the French Kidney Cancer Research Network, under the UroCCR Project (NCT03293563). Patients who underwent TRPN or RRPN by experienced surgeons in 15 participating centers were included. Data on demographic and clinical parameters, tumor characteristics, renal function, and surgical parameters were collected. The primary outcome was the rate of trifecta achievement, which was defined as a warm ischemia time of less than 25 minutes, negative surgical margins, and no major complications. Secondary outcomes included operative time, hospital length-of-stay, blood loss, postoperative complications, postoperative renal function, and each trifecta item taken alone. Subgroup analysis was done according to tumor location. RESULTS: A total of 2879 patients (2581 TRPN vs. 298 RRPN) were included in the study. Before matching, trifecta was achieved in 73.0% of the patients in the TRPN group compared to 77.5% in the RRPN group (P=0.094). After matching 157 patients who underwent TRPN to 157 patients who underwent RRPN, the trifecta rate was 82.8% in the TRPN group vs. 84.0% in the RRPN group (P=0.065). The RRPN group showed shorter operative time (123 vs. 171 min; P<0.001) and less blood loss (161 vs. 293 mL; P<0.001). RRPN showed a higher trifecta achievement for posterior tumors than TRPN (71% vs. 81%; P=0.017). CONCLUSIONS: RRPN is a viable alternative to the transperitoneal approach, particularly for posterior renal tumors, and is a safe and effective option for partial nephrectomy.

Late complications and 5 years outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy in France: prospective assessment in the French Kidney Cancer Research Network (UroCCR 10).

PURPOSE: To describe the practice of robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in France and prospectively assess the late complications and long-term outcomes. METHODS: Prospective, multicenter (n = 16), observational study including all patients diagnosed with a renal tumor who underwent RAPN. Preoperative, intraoperative, postoperative, and follow-up data were collected and stored in the French research network for kidney cancer database (UroCCR). Patients were included over a period of 12 months, then followed for 5 years. RESULTS: In total, 466 patients were included, representing 472 RAPN. The mean tumor size was 3.4 ± 1.7 cm, most of moderate complexity (median PADUA and RENAL scores of 8 [7-10] and 7 [5-9]). Indication for nephron-sparing surgery was relative in 7.1% of cases and imperative in 11.8%. Intraoperative complications occurred in 6.8% of patients and 4.2% of RAPN had to be converted to open surgery. Severe postoperative complications were experienced in 2.3% of patients and late complications in 48 patients (10.3%), mostly within the first 3 months and mainly comprising vascular, infectious, or parietal complications. At 5 years, 29 patients (6.2%) had chronic kidney disease upstaging, 21 (4.5%) were diagnosed with local recurrence, eight (1.7%) with contralateral recurrence, 25 (5.4%) with metastatic progression, and 10 (2.1%) died of the disease. CONCLUSION: Our results reflect the contemporary practice of French expert centers and is, to our knowledge, the first to provide prospective data on late complications associated with RAPN. We have shown that RAPN provides good functional and oncologic outcomes while limiting short- and long-term morbidity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03292549.

Efficacy, Safety, and Reoperation-free Survival of Artificial Urinary Sphincter in Non-neurological Male Patients over 75 Years of Age.

Background: Artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is a gold standard treatment in male stress urinary incontinence but remains poorly used in elderly patients. Objective: To assess the efficacy, safety, and reoperation-free survival of AUS implantation in male patients over 75 yr of age. Design setting and participants: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of all 1233 non-neurological male AUS implantations between 2005 and 2020 at 13 French centers. We compared 330 patients ≥75 yr old (GROUP75+) with 903 patients <75 yr old (GROUP75-) at the time of AUS implantation. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Our primary endpoint was social continence at 3 mo defined as the use of one or fewer pad daily. We used Kaplan-Meier analyses to assess reoperation-free survival. We sought factors of erosion using logistic regression. Results and limitations: Early postoperative continence was comparable in both groups (74.4% vs 80.1%, p = 0.114). We observed a higher rate of postoperative complications in GROUP75+ (18.8% vs 12.6%, p = 0.014), but the complications were more frequently of low grade in GROUP75+ (p = 0.025). The overall reoperation-free survival was similar (p = 0.076) after a median follow-up of 2 yr. However, patients in GROUP75+ had poorer explantation-free survival (p < 0.0001). A history of radiotherapy was a predictive factor of erosion (odds ratio [OR] = 5.31, p < 0.01), but age was not (OR = 1.08, p = 0.87). Unfortunately, our dataset did not include a systematic geriatric evaluation. Conclusions: AUS in elderly patients appears to be an effective option to treat stress urinary incontinence. However, we observed more postoperative complications and explantations, although age was not associated with the onset of erosion. A prospective study is required to determine whether a geriatric evaluation would be an effective strategy to select patients before surgery. Patient summary: In this study, we looked at outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter in elderly men in a large population. We found satisfying efficacy but slightly more postoperative complications and device infections.

Minimally invasive nephron-sparing treatments for T1 renal cell cancer in patients over 75 years: a comparison of outcomes after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy and percutaneous ablation.

PURPOSE: To compare the oncological and perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) and percutaneous thermal ablation (PTA) for treatment of T1 renal cell cancer (RCC) in patients older than 75 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective national multicenter study included all patients older than 75 years treated for a T1 RCC by RPN or PTA between January 2010 and January 2021. Patients' characteristics, tumor data, and perioperative and oncological outcomes were compared. RESULTS: A total of 205 patients for 209 procedures (143 RPN and 66 PTA) were included. In the PTA group, patients were older (80.4 ± 3.7 vs. 79 ± 3.7 years (p = 0.01)); frailer (ASA score (2.43 ± 0.6 vs. 2.17 ± 0.6 (p < 0.01)); and more frequently had a history of kidney surgery (16.7% [11/66] vs. 5.6% [8/143] (p = 0.01)) than in the RPN group. Tumors were larger in the RPN group (2.7 ± 0.7 vs. 3.2 ± 0.9 cm (p < 0.01)). Operation time, length of hospital stay, and increase of creatinine serum level were higher in RPN (respectively 92.1 ± 42.7 vs. 150.7 ± 61.3 min (p < 0.01); 1.7 ± 1.4 vs. 4.2 ± 3.4 days (p < 0.01); 1.9 ± 19.3% vs. 10.1 ± 23.7 (p = 0.03)). Disease-free survival and time to progression were similar (respectively, HR 2.2; 95% CI 0.88-5.5; p = 0.09; HR 2.1; 95% CI 0.86-5.2; p = 0.1). Overall survival was shorter for PTA that disappeared after Cox adjusting model (HR 3.3; 95% CI 0.87-12.72; p = 0.08). CONCLUSION: Similar oncological outcomes are observed after PTA and RPN for T1 RCC in elderly patients. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy and percutaneous thermal ablation have similar oncological outcomes for T1a kidney cancer in patients over 75 years; however, operative time, decrease in renal function, and length of hospital stay were lower with ablation. KEY POINTS: • After adjusting model for age and ASA score, similar oncological outcomes are observed after percutaneous thermal ablation and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for T1 renal cell cancer in elderly patients. • Operation time, length of hospital stay, and increase of creatinine serum level were higher in the robot-assisted partial nephrectomy group.

Eliciting men's preferences for decision-making relative to treatments of localized prostate cancer with a good or moderate prognosis.

PURPOSE: In diseases where there is no real consensus regarding treatment modalities, promoting shared decision-making can contribute to improving safety and quality of care. This is the case in low- or intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer (PC) treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the preferences guiding men's decisions regarding the characteristics of the treatment strategies for PC to help physicians adopt a more patient-centered approach. METHODS: This prospective multicenter study used a discrete choice experiment (DCE). The attributes and the modalities were identified from a qualitative study and a literature review. Relative preferences were estimated using a logistic regression model. Interaction terms (demographic, clinical and socio-economic characteristics) were added to the model to assess heterogeneity in preferences. RESULTS: 652 men were enrolled in the study and completed a questionnaire with 12 pairs of hypothetical therapeutic alternatives between which they had to choose. Men's choices were significantly negatively influenced by the risk of impotence and urinary incontinence, death, and the length and frequency of care. They preferred treatments with a rescue possibility in case of deterioration or recurrence and the use of innovative technology. Surprisingly, the possibility of undergoing prostate ablation negatively influenced their choice. The results also highlighted differences in trade-offs according to socio-economic level. CONCLUSION: This study confirmed the importance of considering patients' preferences in the decision-making process. It appears essential to better understand these preferences to allow physicians to improve communication and promote case-by-case decision-making.