The landscape of penile cancer research in Germany and Austria: a survey among professors in academic centers holding chair positions and results of a literature search.

BACKGROUND: Research on penile cancer (PeCa) is predominantly conducted in countries with centralized treatment of PeCa-patients. In Germany and Austria (G + A), no state-regulated centralization is established, and no information is available on how PeCa-research is organized. METHODS: Current research competence in PeCa was assessed by a 36-item questionnaire sent to all chairholders of urological academic centers in G + A. Based on PubMed records, all scientific PeCa-articles of 2012-2022 from G + A were identified. Current research trends were assessed by dividing the literature search into two periods (P1: 2012-2017, P2: 2018-2022). A bibliometric analysis was supplemented. RESULTS: Response rate of the questionnaire was 75%, a median of 13 (IQR: 9-26) PeCa-patients/center was observed in 2021. Retrospective case series were conducted by 38.9% of participating clinics, while involvement in randomized-controlled trials was stated in 8.3% and in basic/fundamental research in 19.4%. 77.8% declared an interest in future multicenter projects. 205 PeCa-articles were identified [median impact factor: 2.77 (IQR: 0.90-4.37)]. Compared to P1, P2 showed a significant increase in the median annual publication count (29 (IQR: 13-17) vs. 15 (IQR: 19-29), p < 0.001), in multicenter studies (79.1% vs. 63.6%, p = 0.018), and in multinational studies (53% vs. 28.9%, p < 0.001); the proportion of basic/fundamental research articles significantly declined (16.5% vs. 28.9%, p = 0.041). Four of the top-5 institutions publishing PeCa-articles are academic centers. Bibliometric analyses revealed author networks, primary research areas in PeCa, and dominant journals for publications. CONCLUSIONS: Given the lack of centralization in G + A, this analysis highlights the need for research coordination within multicenter PeCa-projects. The decline in basic/fundamental research should be effectively addressed by the allocation of funded research projects.

Centralizing Penile Cancer Care in Germany and Austria: Just a Dream or a Fast-Approaching Reality? Results of a Survey Study among Urological Department Chairs and Modeling of Real Treatment Numbers of Penile Cancer Patients.

INTRODUCTION: In countries characterized by a centralization of therapy management, patients with penile cancer (PeCa) have shown improvements in guideline adherence and ultimately, improved carcinoma-specific survival. Germany and Austria (G + A) have no state-regulated centralization of PeCa management, and the perspectives of urological university department chairs (UUDCs) in these countries, who act as drivers of professional and political developments, on this topic are currently unknown. METHODS: Surveys containing 36 response options, including specific questions regarding perspectives on PeCa centralization, were sent to the 48 UUDC in G + A in January 2023. In addition to analyzing the responses, closely following the CROSS checklist, a modeling of the real healthcare situation of in-house PeCa patients in G + A was conducted. RESULTS: The response rate was 75% (36/48). 94% and 89% of the UUDCs considered PeCa centralization meaningful and feasible in the medium term, respectively. Among the UUDCs, 72% estimated centralization within university hospitals as appropriate, while 28% favored a geographically oriented approach. Additionally, 97% of the UUDCs emphasized the importance of bridging the gap until implementation of centralization by establishing PeCa second-opinion portals. No country-specific differences were observed. The median number of in-house PeCa cases at the university hospitals in G + A was 13 (interquartile range: 9-26). A significant positive correlation was observed between the annual number of in-house PeCa cases at a given university hospital and the perspective of the UUDCs that centralization as meaningful by its UUDC (0.024). Under assumptions permissible for modeling, the average number of in-house PeCa cases in academic hospitals in G + A was approximately 30 times higher than in nonacademic hospitals. CONCLUSION: This study provides the first data on the perspectives of UUDCs in G + A concerning centralization of PeCa therapy management. Even without state-regulated centralization in G + A, there is currently a clear focusing of PeCa treatments in university hospitals. Further necessary steps toward a structured PeCa centralization are discussed in this manuscript.

[Are there any volume-related effects on treatment options for patients with penile cancer? Results of a survey among university hospitals in Germany and Austria]. / Gibt es fallzahlabhängige Effekte auf Behandlungsangebote für Patienten mit einem Peniskarzinom? Ergebnisse einer Umfrage an Universitätsklinika in Deutschland und Österreich.

BACKGROUND: Currently, 959 men in Germany and 67 in Austria are diagnosed with penile cancer each year, with an increase of approximately 20% in the last decade [RKI 2021, Statcube.at 2023]. Despite the rising incidence, the number of cases per hospital remains low. The median annual number of penile cancer cases at university hospitals in the DACH region was 7 patients (IQR 5-10) in 2017 [E-PROPS group 2021]. The compromised institutional expertise due to low case numbers is compounded with inadequate adherence to penile cancer guidelines, as shown in several studies. The centralization, which is rigorously implemented in countries such as the UK, enabled a significant increase in organ-preserving primary tumor surgery and stage-adapted lymphadenectomies, as well as improved patient survival in cases of penile cancer, resulting in a claim for a similar centralization in Germany and Austria. The aim of this study was to determine the current effects of case volume on penile cancer related treatment options at university hospitals in Germany and Austria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In January 2023, a survey was sent to the heads of 48 urological university hospitals in Germany and Austria, including questions regarding case volume in 2021 (total number of inpatient and penile cancer cases), treatment options for primary tumors and inguinal lymphadenectomy (ILAE), the availability of a designated penile cancer surgeon, and the professional responsibility for systemic therapies in penile cancer. Correlations and differences related to case volume were statistically analyzed without adjustments. RESULTS: The response rate was 75% (n=36/48). In total, 626 penile cancer patients were treated at the 36 responding university hospitals in 2021, representing approximately 60% of the expected incidence in Germany and Austria. The annual median total number of cases was 2807 (IQR 1937-3653), and for penile cancer, it was 13 (IQR 9-26). There was no significant correlation between the total inpatient and penile cancer caseloads (p=0.34). The number of organ-preserving therapy procedures for the primary tumor, the availability of modern ILAE procedures, the presence of a designated penile cancer surgeon, and the responsibility for systemic therapies were not significantly influenced by the total inpatient or penile cancer case volume of the treating hospitals, regardless of whether the case volumes were dichotomized at the median or upper quartile. No significant differences between Germany and Austria were observed. CONCLUSION: Despite a significant increase in the annual number of penile cancer cases at university hospitals in Germany and Austria compared to 2017, we found no case volume-related effects on structural quality with respect to penile cancer therapy. In the light of the proven benefits of centralization, we interpret this result as an argument for the necessity of establishing nationally organized penile cancer centers with even higher case volumes compared to the status quo, in light of the proven benefits of centralization.

[Initial presentation of the Pentafecta score as a quality instrument for outcome evaluation of primary surgical treatment in patients with penile cancer]. / Erstvorstellung des Pentafecta-Scores als Qualitätsinstrument der Outcome-Bewertung einer chirurgischen Primärtherapie an Patienten mit Peniskarzinom.

BACKGROUND: Recently, the Tetrafecta score has been published as the first instrument for assessing the quality of primary surgical treatment for penile cancer (PECa). An external scientific discussion about the defining criteria is still pending and forms the study objective. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An international working group consisting of 12 urologists and an oncologist with clinical and academic-scientific expertise in penile cancer was established. In a modified four-stage Delphi process, a total of 13 criteria for PECa patients in clinical AJCC stages 1-4 (T1-3N0-3, but M0) were defined, incorporating the Tetrafecta criteria. Each expert had to select five of these criteria in a secret ballot to generate an individual Pentafecta score. Subsequently, the experts' ratings were aggregated and a final Pentafecta score was formed. RESULTS: None of the original Tetrafecta criteria were included in the final Pentafecta score, which consisted of the following criteria: 1) organ preservation, if possible (≤T2), but always with negative surgical margins, 2) bilateral inguinal lymph node dissection (ILND) from ≥pT1G2N0, 3) perioperative chemotherapy if indicated by guidelines, 4) ILND, if indicated, within a maximum of three months after primary tumour resection, and 5) the treating clinic should perform at least 15 primary surgical treatments in PECa patients. Only in seven out of the 13 experts (54%), a strong correlation was found between individual Pentafecta scores and the final Pentafecta score (rsp >0.60). CONCLUSION: Based on a moderated voting process among international PECa experts, a Pentafecta score was developed as a quality assurance instrument for primary surgical treatment, which now needs to be validated using patient-relevant and patient-reported endpoints.

The Goal of Achieving High-Quality Surgical First-Line Therapy in Patients with Penile Cancer Is Important; However, Some Collective Efforts Are Still Required in Order to Reach It. Comment on Brassetti et al. Combined Reporting of Surgical Quality and Cancer Control after Surgical Treatment for Penile Tumors with Inguinal Lymph Node Dissection: The Tetrafecta Achievement. Curr. Oncol. 2023, 30, 1882-1892.

We read with great interest the manuscript by Brassetti et al. recently published in your journal and hope it will encourage discussion and debate around the optimization of the surgical management of patients with penile cancer (PECa) [...].

[Knowledge of German-speaking urologists regarding the association between penile cancer and human papilloma virus: results of a survey of the European PROspective Penile Cancer Study (E-PROPS)]. / Kenntnisse von deutschsprachigen Urologen zur Häufigkeit der Assoziation des Peniskarzinoms mit dem Humanen Papillomavirus ­ Survey-Ergebnisse der European PROspective Penile Cancer Study (E-PROPS).

BACKGROUND: A recent meta-analysis showed that penile cancer (PeC) is associated with the human papilloma virus (HPV) in 50 % of patients in Europe. It is unknown whether urologists are aware of the impact of viral carcinogenesis. METHODS: A (German-language) survey comprising 14 items was created and sent to urologists of 45 clinical centres in Germany (n = 34), Austria (n = 8), Switzerland (n = 2) and Italy/South Tyrol (n = 1) once in Q3/2018. According to a predefined quality standard, a total of 557 surveys were eligible for final data analysis (response rate: 85.7 %). Among other questions, urologists were asked to state the frequency of HPV-associated PeC in Europe. 4 potential answers were provided: (A)-"< 25 %", (B)-"25 - 50 %", (C)-"> 50 - 75 %", (D)-"level of association unknown". For the final calculation, a tolerance of ±â€Š50 % was considered acceptable, so B and C were deemed correct answers. Based on a bootstrap-adjusted multivariate logistic regression model, criteria independently predicting a correct answer were identified. RESULTS: Categories A-D were selected in 19.2 % (n = 107), 48.8 % (n = 272), 12.9 % (n = 72) and 19 % (n = 106), respectively, representing a rate of 61.8 % of urologists (n = 344) reaching the endpoint (B + C). Autonomous performance of chemotherapy for PeC by urologists within the given centre (OR 1.55, p[Bootstrap] = 0.036) and the centre's number of urological beds (OR 1.02, p[Bootstrap] = 0.025) were the only parameters showing a significant independent impact on the endpoint. In contrast, the status of a university centre (p = 0.143), a leading position of the responding urologist (p = 0.375) and the number of PeC patients treated per year and centre (p = 0.571) did not significantly predict a correct answer. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate insufficient knowledge on the association of PeC and HPV among German-speaking urologists.

Clinical Importance of a Peritoneal Interposition Flap to Prevent Symptomatic Lymphoceles after Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) including pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is the current state of the art in surgical therapy of localized prostate cancer with intermediate or high risk. PLND in particular is associated with morbidity inherent to this method; the rate of symptomatic lymphoceles (sLCs), for example, ranges up to 10%. OBJECTIVE: Various intraoperative modifications have been developed with the aim of reducing the sLC rate. Based on current studies, a peritoneal interposition flap (PIF) appears to be one of the most effective methods for this purpose. Under the criteria of a systematic review, 5 retrospective studies have been identified until now, 4 of which showed a positive effect of PIF on the sLC rate. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 1,308 patients were included in the aggregated analysis of these 5 studies. The amount of sLCs was 1.3% (8/604) and 5.7% (40/704) in the PIF and standard groups, respectively (p < 0.001). The resulting odds ratio (OR) was 0.23 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.05-0.99), taking in-to account a noteworthy heterogeneity of the 5 studies (Q = 9.47, p = 0.05; I2 = 58%). In addition, a prospective randomized and blinded study (Pianoforte trial) with corresponding sLC rates of 8.3% (9/108) versus 9.7% (12/124) (p = 0.820) exists. In this study, the OR was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.34-2.10, p = 0.722). CONCLUSION: Despite positive results from retrospective studies with indirect evidence, the role of the PIF in the reduction of sLC in RARP could not be conclusively assessed yet. The results of the first prospective randomized study do not show a positive effect of PIF, declaring a research gap for further studies with direct evidence.

Job Satisfaction and Intentions to Leave of Foreign-National Urologists Working at German Hospitals: Results of the Cross-Sectional EUTAKD Study.

BACKGROUND: Studies exist that identify factors associated with higher professional satisfaction among clinicians. However, there are no reliable findings for clinicians with a migration background as to whether there is a correlation between particular dimensions of professional satisfaction and the desire to leave their current specialty or country of employment. For the first time, these data were collected within a questionnaire-based study from urological clinicians with a migration background (UCMBs) working in Germany. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A SurveyMonkey® with 101 items relating to characterizing features of the study participants and questions about job satisfaction (n = 39) was opened for UCMBs between August and October 2020. The influence of different dimensions of job satisfaction on the desire to quit the urological specialty/leave Germany was analyzed (group A: neither want to leave urology nor Germany; group B: can at least imagine leaving the urological profession and/or Germany). RESULTS: Eighty-one UCMBs were distributed almost equally in groups A (50.6%) and B (49.4%). Occupational satisfaction was higher in several respects in group A. Three dimensions that differed significantly with regard to occupational satisfaction were used to create an aggregate score ranging from 3 to 15 points as follows: (1) relationship to superiors (p = 0.014), (2) career opportunities in the clinic (p < 0.001), and (3) opportunities for the further development of surgical skills (p = 0.006). For each point value of this aggregate score, the UCMB's desire to quit urology or leave Germany (or at least uncertainty about this question) decreased by a relative value of 34.6% (odds ratio: 0.654, 95% confidence interval: 0.496-0.861, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Various dimensions of job satisfaction have been identified, the improvement of which could contribute to the long-term retention of UCMBs at German urological clinics.

Does the Identification of a Minimum Number of Cases Correlate With Better Adherence to International Guidelines Regarding the Treatment of Penile Cancer? Survey Results of the European PROspective Penile Cancer Study (E-PROPS).

BACKGROUND: Penile cancer represents a rare malignant disease, whereby a small caseload is associated with the risk of inadequate treatment expertise. Thus, we hypothesized that strict guideline adherence might be considered a potential surrogate for treatment quality. This study investigated the influence of the annual hospital caseload on guideline adherence regarding treatment recommendations for penile cancer. METHODS: In a 2018 survey study, 681 urologists from 45 hospitals in four European countries were queried about six hypothetical case scenarios (CS): local treatment of the primary tumor pTis (CS1) and pT1b (CS2); lymph node surgery inguinal (CS3) and pelvic (CS4); and chemotherapy neoadjuvant (CS5) and adjuvant (CS6). Only the responses from 206 head and senior physicians, as decision makers, were evaluated. The answers were assessed based on the applicable European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines regarding their correctness. The real hospital caseload was analyzed based on multivariate logistic regression models regarding its effect on guideline adherence. RESULTS: The median annual hospital caseload was 6 (interquartile range (IQR) 3-9). Recommendations for CS1-6 were correct in 79%, 66%, 39%, 27%, 28%, and 28%, respectively. The probability of a guideline-adherent recommendation increased with each patient treated per year in a clinic for CS1, CS2, CS3, and CS6 by 16%, 7.8%, 7.2%, and 9.5%, respectively (each p < 0.05); CS4 and CS5 were not influenced by caseload. A caseload threshold with a higher guideline adherence for all endpoints could not be perceived. The type of hospital care (academic vs. non-academic) did not affect guideline adherence in any scenario. CONCLUSIONS: Guideline adherence for most treatment recommendations increases with growing annual penile cancer caseload. Thus, the results of our study call for a stronger centralization of diagnosis and treatment strategies regarding penile cancer.

[Relationship between non-medical reading and burnout as well as professional satisfaction among urologists with migrant background: results of the EUTAKD survey study conducted at German hospitals]. / Zusammenhang zwischen dem Lesen nicht-medizinischer Bücher mit Burnout und beruflicher Zufriedenheit bei Urologen mit Migrationshintergrund ­ Ergebnisse einer Fragebogenstudie an deutschen Kliniken.

BACKGROUND: There are no study results on the private and professional satisfaction and the burnout risk of urologists with a migrant background at German hospitals to date. Non-medical reading has been described to have an influence on lower burnout rates among physicians of different specialties. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A SurveyMonkey questionnaire with 101 items on criteria characterising the study participant, questions on private and professional satisfaction and the complete Maslach Burnout Inventory was opened to urologists with a migrant background at German clinics between August and October 2020. The impact of non-medical reading on professional satisfaction and burnout was comparatively assessed (group A: ≤1 book/12 months versus group B: ≥2 books/12 months). RESULTS: Eighty-one study participants were included. They were almost equally distributed into groups A (49.4%) and B (50.6%). In several items on personal and professional satisfaction, there was a significantly higher satisfaction in group B. In the burnout dimensions of emotional exhaustion (EE), depersonalisation (DP) and personal accomplishment (PA), a high risk of burnout was present in 27.9%, 35.3% and 73.5% of the study participants. A group comparison revealed significant advantages for Group B in the PA dimension in both the sum score (p=0.001) and the categorical comparison (p=0.002). Study participants in Group B also had a significantly lower DP dimension sum score compared with Group A (p=0.047). The group variable was independently associated with a combined score of EE and DP on the one hand (OR 0.316; p=0.031) and the PA dimension on the other (OR 0.170; p=0.024). CONCLUSIONS: Reading non-medical books was associated with higher professional satisfaction and a lower burnout risk among urologists with a migrant background at German hospitals.

Adherence to European Association of Urology and National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines Criteria for Inguinal and Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in Penile Cancer Patients-A Survey Assessment in German-speaking Countries on Behalf of the European Prospective Penile Cancer Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Urologists' adherence to European Association of Urology and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline recommendations to perform inguinal (ILND) and pelvic (PLND) lymph node dissection in penile cancer (PC) patients is not known. OBJECTIVE: To assess a German-speaking European cohort of urologists based on their criteria to perform ILND and PLND in PC patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A 14-item survey addressing general issues of PC treatment was developed and sent to 45 clinical centers in Germany (n = 34), Austria (n = 8), Switzerland (n = 2), and Italy (n = 1). INTERVENTION: Two of the 14 questions assessed the criteria to perform ILND and ipsilateral PLND. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Correct responses for ILND and PLND criteria were assessed. Based on a multivariate logistic-regression-model, criteria independently predicting guideline adherence were identified. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 557 urologists participated in the survey, of whom 43.5%, 19.3%, and 37.2% were residents in training, certified, and in leading positions, respectively. ILND and PLND criteria were correctly identified by 35.2% and 23.9%, respectively. Of the participants, 23.3% used external sources for survey completion. The use of auxiliary tools (odds ratio [OR] 1.57; p[bootstrapped] = 0.028) and participants outside of Germany (OR 0.56; p[bootstrapped] = 0.006) were predictors of ILND guideline adherence. The number of PC patients treated yearly (p = 0.012; OR 1.06) and the use of auxiliary tools (p < 0.001; OR 5.88) were predictors of PLND adherence. Department size, healthcare status, professional status, and responsibility for PC surgery did not predict endpoints. Limitations include sample size and results in comparison with retrospective studies. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate overall suboptimal knowledge of the correct indications to perform ILND and PLND in PC patients among the surveyed urologists. We propose that governments and healthcare providers should be encouraged to centralize PC management. PATIENT SUMMARY: The management of inguinal and pelvic lymph nodes is crucial for the survival of penile cancer patients. Disease rarity mandates referral to clinical practice guidelines for appropriate treatment selection.

Adherence to the EAU Guideline Recommendations for Local Tumor Treatment in Penile Cancer: Results of the European PROspective Penile Cancer Study Group Survey (E-PROPS).

INTRODUCTION: Penile cancer (PeCa) is an orphan disease in European countries. The current guidelines are predominantly based on retrospective studies with a low level of evidence. In our study, we aimed to identify predictors for guideline-conform treatment and hypothesize that reference centers for PeCa and physicians' experience promote guideline compliance and therefore correct local tumor therapy. METHODS: This study is part of the European PROspective Penile Cancer Study (E-PROPS), an international collaboration group evaluating therapeutic management for PeCa in Central Europe. For this module, a 14-item-survey was developed and sent to 681 urologists in 45 European centers. Three questions focused on therapeutic decisions for PeCa in clinical stage Tis, Ta-T1a, and T1b. Four questions addressed potential personal confounders. Survey results were analyzed by bootstrap-adjusted stepwise multivariate linear regression analysis to identify predictors for EAU guideline-conform local treatment of PeCa. RESULTS: For local therapy of cTis 80.4% recommended guideline-conform treatment, for cTa-cT1a 87.3% and for cT1b 59.1%. In total, 42.4% chose a correct approach in all tumor stages. The number of PeCa patients treated at the hospital, a higher level of training of the physicians, resource-based answering and the option of penile-sparing surgery offered at the hospital matched with giving guideline-conform recommendations and thus accurate local tumor treatment. CONCLUSION: Patients with PeCa are best treated by experienced physicians, in centers with a high number of cases, which also offer a wide range of local tumor therapy. This could be offered in reference centers.

A Stent for Every Stone? Prestenting Habits and Outcomes from a German Multicenter Prospective Study on the Benchmarks of Ureteroroscopic Stone Treatment (BUSTER).

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies have shown that prestenting in ureterorenoscopic stone removal (URS) is carried out more frequently in Germany than in other countries. OBJECTIVE: This investigation evaluated the impact of high prestenting rates on outcomes as well as the influence of stone characteristics and treatment habits on prestenting. METHODS: The dataset from the BUSTER observational study was used. Patient and stone characteristics, as well as treatment outcomes, were analyzed for 307 cases from 14 urological clinics in Germany. RESULTS: The overall prestenting rate was 70.0%. Prestenting rates were significantly higher for renal stones than ureteric stones (84.6 vs. 60.6%, p < 0.0001). Compared to the unstented cases, prestenting for renal stones improved stone-free rates (73.2 vs. 11.1%, p < 0.0001) and increased the rate of completely lesion-free URS (45.4 vs. 16.7%, p = 0.034) while reducing the rate of poststenting (from 100 to 80.8%, p = 0.041). None of these effects could be demonstrated when prestenting for ureteric stones. Prestenting rates were less variable for renal stones (57-100%) than for ureteric stones (0-100%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the benefits of prestenting in URS for renal stones but not for ureteric stones. There were considerable differences in prestenting rates between the participating clinics.

Risk Factors for Ureteral Damage in Ureteroscopic stone Treatment: Results of the German Prospective Multicentre Benchmarks of Ureterorenoscopic Stone Treatment-Results in Terms of Complications, Quality of Life, and Stone-Free Rates Project.

BACKGROUND: The Post-Ureteroscopic Lesion Scale (PULS) is a validated, standardised scale that classifies iatrogenic ureteral lesions during ureteroscopy (URS). OBJECTIVE: To determine risk factors for the various PULS-grades caused by URS. METHOD: We prospectively investigated the independent influence of various risk factors in correlation with PULS-Grade 1+ and 2+ on 307 patients with ureterorenoscopic stone treatment from 14 German urologic departments. RESULTS: The following are the outcomes of the study: 117 (38.4%) and 188 (61.6%) of the calculi (median stone size 6 mm) were found in the kidney or ureter; 70% and 82.4% underwent preoperative or postoperative ureteral stenting; 44.3 and 7.2% received laser or ballistic lithotripsy; 60% of the patients presented with PULS grade 1+ and 8% with PULS grade of 2+. Only intracorporal lithotripsy revealed a significant independent risk factor for PULS grade 1+ or 2+. Both laser and ballistic therapies raised the probability of PULS grade 1+ by the factors 3.6 (p < 0.001) and 3.9 (p = 0.021), respectively. The ORs in conjunction with PULS grade 2+ were 3.1 (p = 0.038) and 5.8 (p = 0.014) respectively. Neither endpoint exhibited a significant difference regarding the lithotripsic procedure (laser vs. ballistic). CONCLUSION: Intracorporal lithotripsy is associated with a significant increase in damage to the ureter; further research is needed to determine its long-term effects.

Hospital volume in ureterorenoscopic stone treatment: 99 operations per year could increase the chance of a better outcome-results of the German prospective multicentre BUSTER project.

BACKGROUND: Despite the high utilisation of ureterorenoscopy (URS) in interventional stone treatment, there is little evidence of any link between annual hospital volume and outcome. METHODS: From January to April 2015, data from 307 URS patients were prospectively recorded in the multicentre observational BUSTER-Trial (Benchmarks of ureterorenoscopic stone treatment-results in terms of complications, quality of life, and stone-free rates). The best threshold value for annual hospital volume with an independent effect on the outcome (measured on stone-free and complication rates) of our study group was established with logistic regression. RESULTS: In 38.4% of cases of renal and 61.6% of ureteral stones, median stone size was 6 mm with an interquartile range (IQR) of 4-8 mm. The annual URS rate in the 14 participating hospitals ranged from 77 to 333 (median 144; IQR 109-208). The binary endpoint as a combination of completely stone-free or residual fragments small enough to pass spontaneously and a maximum complication severity of Clavien-Dindo grade 1 was attained in 234/252 (92.9%) cases with a hospital volume of ≥ 99 URS compared with 43/55 (78.2%) in < 99 URS (p = 0.002). Adjusted for patient-, stone- and physician-related factors, an annual hospital URS volume of ≥ 99 increases the chance of an optimum outcome (OR = 3.92; 95% CI 1.46-10.51; p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: An independent effect of URS hospital volume on outcome quality in the 14 participating hospitals was demonstrated. Threshold values for annual case numbers should be scientifically established irrespective of the considered procedure.