Role of Restaging Transurethral Resection for T1 Non-muscle invasive Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Repeat transurethral resection (reTUR) is advocated as a fundamental step towards complete clearance and appropriate staging of T1 bladder cancer tumors. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of reTUR in T1 bladder cancer via a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of available data sets. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: After definition of the population and of the outcome, a systematic search of English language articles in the literature from 1980 to 2016 was performed. The pooled prevalence of residual tumor and of upstaging at reTUR were assessed and computed using a random effects model to take into account heterogeneity showed by I2 and Cochran's Q values. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to exclude excessive influence by a single study. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Among the papers identified, 29 were selected. A total of 3566 and 2556 cases formed the study population for assessment of the prevalence of residual tumor and upstaging, respectively. The corresponding numbers for the subgroup with detrusor muscle involvement at the initial TUR were 1565 and 1187. The pooled prevalence was 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-0.63) for residual tumor and 0.1 (95% CI 0.06-0.14) for upstaging to T2 at reTUR. The corresponding rates for the detrusor muscle subgroup were 0.47 (95% CI 0.33-0.62) and 0.1 (95% CI 0.06-0.14). The sensitivity analysis excluded an excessive influence of each of the studies examined. CONCLUSIONS: Pooled prevalence rates for residual tumor (∼50%) and upstaging to invasive disease (10%) at reTUR in T1 cases were high, and were stable among studies in different decades and for cases with detrusor muscle involvement at the initial TUR. Therefore, reTUR remains a fundamental procedure. PATIENT SUMMARY: Repeat transurethral resection after a diagnosis of stage T1 bladder cancer is recommended given the high risk of misallocation to the proper treatment.

Bilateral ureteroarterial fistula: a case report and review of literature.

Ureteral arterial fistula (UAF) is an uncommon condition characterized by a direct fistulous communication between a ureter and an iliac artery resulting in bleeding into the ureter, which can be massive and life-threatening because of hemodynamic instability, as confirmed by the high mortality rate (7-23% overall).This condition is actually increasing in frequency because of its relation to predisposing factors such as vascular pathology, previous radiation therapy, previous surgery, and necessity of ureteral stenting. Diagnosis is often challenging, as in most patients, the only symptom is hematuria and the treatment may require a multidisciplinary approach, including the expertise of the urologist, vascular surgeon, and interventional radiologist. Endovascular approach offers advantages over open surgery decreasing morbidity (reduced risk of injury to adjacent structure) and shortening hospital staying. There is no consensus regarding the safety of intentional occlusion of the hypogastric artery: proximal occlusion of a hypogastric artery typically produces little or no clinical symptoms due to well-collateralized pelvic arterial networks. On the contrary, significant complications, such as colonic ischemia, spinal cord paralysis, buttock claudication, or erectile dysfunction, are well-recognized adverse events after hypogastric artery embolization, especially in bilateral cases. We describe our experience of a bilateral UAF treated with bilateral endvascular approach.

[Use of zoledronic acid in patients with prostate cancer bone metastases: control of pain and musculoskeletal complications]. / Utilizzo di acido zoledronico in pazienti con metastasi ossee da carcinoma prostatico: controllo del dolore e delle complicanze muscolo-scheletriche.

Background. Patients suffering from prostatic carcinoma are at high risk of having bone complications because of the metastatic progression of the disease to the skeleton and the consequences of androgenic deprivation. Zoledronic acid is a potent inhibitor of the bone resorption mediated by the osteoclasts, and is the only bisphosphonate whose capacity of reducing significantly the skeleton morbidity in patients with bone metastases is statistically proved. Methods. To attest tolerability and efficacy of zoledronic acid in preventing unfavorable skeletal events and in reducing osteomuscular pain, 25 patients - aged 75 years, suffering from hormone-responsive prostatic carcinoma under hormonal therapy with bone metastases, have been followed and subjected to IV monthly infusion of 4 mg zoledronic acid for 12 consecutive months, associated to daily intake of calcium and multivitamin supplementations. Results. At the end of the study, a sensible improvement in their clinical conditions and in their perception of the pain has been recorded in 23 patients and valued through a set of questions (Brief Pain Inventory). Conclusions. Zoledronic acid is therefore confirmed to be an effective medicine in preventing the skeleton complications and in controlling the painful symptoms in patients suffering from prostatic carcinoma with bone metastases.

High burden stones: the role of SWL.

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), PCNL and Shock Wave Lithotripsy (SWL), SWL monotherapy and open surgery are nowadays the potential treatment alternatives for patients with staghorn stones. Several groups have proposed classification schemes to better define staghorn calculi dimensions taking into account size, morphology and composition of the stones. More recently the use of a CT imaging with three-dimensional reconstruction or of a coronal reconstruction of axial CT images was reported to obtain an accurate stone volume calculation. The difficulty in accurately assessing stone burden explains the wide range of reported stone-free rates for SWL monotherapy from 22 to 85%. A recent AUA guideline of the management of staghorn calculi stated that stone free rate is 78% for PCNL and 54% for SWL monotherapy and these values are similar to those reported in Segura guideline but the rate for combination treatment (PNL + SWL) is now lower (66% versus 81%) than in the previous guideline. This reduction is probably due to the fact that in the recent meta-analysis SWL was the last procedure and in the previous generally a sandwich therapy was performed with PCNL followed by a SWL and a secondary PCNL. Improved PCNL techniques with use offlexible nephroscopy and multitract PCNL allow to achieve complete stone clearance by PCNL alone. Complete removal of stone is crucial to eradicate infection and prevent further stone regrowth. Residual fragments may perpetuate postreatment infection and stone regrowth has been reported up to 78% in such patients after SWL monotherapy. In our previous experience (prior to 2000) we observed 45 pts with high burden stones: 31/45 pts (68%) underwent combined therapy PCNL and SWL with a successful rate of 65% (stone free and fragments < 4 mm). In our more recent experience ('03-'08) we treated 34 patients with high burden stones: we performed combined therapy PCNL and SWL in 11 pts (32%) with an overall success rate of 63%. PCNL was undertaken initially with the attempt to remove as much stone as possible with the aid offlexible nephroscopy and SWL was used only for residual stones because the passage, even of fragments < 4 mm, does not always occur in dilated renal cavities. SWL monotherapy should not be used for most patients and may be considered only in patients with small volume staghorn stones with normal collecting system.

[Single session cystolitholapaxy and PCNL for encrusted DJ stent with large associated stone burden]. / Stent DJ calcifico con litiasi multipla calicopielica e vescicale associata: trattamento con litotrissia vescicale e PCNL in una singola seduta.

INTRODUCTION: Ureteral stent use is commonplace in urology to prevent or relieve ureteral obstruction. If ureteral stents are neglected, they can cause severe morbidity due to migration, occlusion, encrustation, breakage, stone formation, and even death, due to life-threatening urosepsis or complications related to operative intervention. Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, ureterorenoscopy, electrohydraulic lithotripsy, laser lithotripsy, and percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy (PCNL) have been reported for forgotten ureteral stent management, but currently there are no guidelines for this challenging situation and only few algorithms have been introduced by some studies. METHODS: We present a case of a man presenting with an encrusted left double J (DJ) stent, inserted two years before, and bulky radiolucent lithiasis at both ends of the stent. The patient was studied with intravenous pyelogram and non contrast-enhanced computed tomography, and then treated with cystolithotripsy and PCNL in a single session. RESULTS: Complete clearance of the stones was obtained and the DJ stent was removed without breaking from the percutaneous access. CONCLUSIONS: Neglected stents still represent a challenge in urology: while endourology remains the best option for treatment, the management of ureteral stents should be based on follow-up and prevention, using for example a computerized warning and stent retrieval software system.

Prospective assessment of the efficacy of the EAU guidelines for the prevention of nosocomial acquired infections after genitourinary surgery in a district hospital.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate incidence and risk factors for nosocomial acquired infections in an urology ward after the application of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines for surgical prophylaxis after genitourinary surgery in a district hospital. METHODS: A three-month survey was performed according with the definitions and methods of the National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System. The study was conducted at the Urology Unit of a district hospital of about 800 care beds. The unit has 24 beds with approximately 1000 patients admitted per year and 750 surgical procedures performed each year. During the study period antimicrobial prophylaxis was administered according to 2006 EAU Guidelines. The following events by CDC criteria were considered: site specific infection (SSI), symptomatic urinary tract infection (SUTI), other infection of urinary tract (OUTI) and blood stream infection (BSI). RESULTS: SUTI incidence density was 31/1000 patients-days and 34/1000 urinary catheter days. SSI and BSI incidence density were respectively 44/1000 and 25/1000 patients day. A total of 177 patients (146 M, 32 F) underwent surgical procedures (17 renal surgeries, 12 retropubic radical prostatectomies, 11 prostatectomies for benign prostatic hyperplasia, 9 cystectomies (with ileal neobladder or external urinary diversion respectively in 3 and 6), 19 male genital surgeries, 21 ureterorenoscopies (with/without lithotripsy), 10 ureteral catheterizations or stenting, 6 nephrostomies, 17 TURP, 50 TURB and 5 other procedures). Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis was administered as a single dose of cefazolin 2 gr i.v. (or as an association of gentamicin and ampicillin) in 92 patients (51%). Nine patients with positive urine culture were treated with antibiotics prior to treatment (5%) and 40 patients were treated postoperatively (22%). After surgery UTI was diagnosed in 6 patients, SSI in 3 and BSI in 11. Risk factors for infection were indwelling catheter in 22, previous history of UTI in 15, long pre operative hospital stay in 2, diabetes in 24 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Antimicrobial prophylaxis according to EAU guidelines together with an active surveillance seems to be adequate to prevent symptomatic/febrile genito-urinary infections as well as serious wound infections in the majority of patients. A further effort should be made in order to identify sub-populations of patients for which the actual prophylactic regimen proved to be less efficacious.

Infections and urolithiasis: current clinical evidence in prophylaxis and antibiotic therapy.

Urinary tract infections and urosepsis are complications which can precede or follow a kidney stone treatment. Often the stones themselves are the source of infection, whether they are infection stones or not. Systemic infections are difficult to foresee, and neither a pre-operative negative urine culture nor an antibiotic prophylaxis avoid infectious complications for certain. The primary predictive risk factors of urosepsis are: patient conditions, urinary tract infection or a history of recurrent infections, characteristics of the stone, and anatomy of the urinary tract. Infection stones are still a matter of debate, concerning both the aetiology of the disease and its treatment. Positive cultures are not only found with struvite stones, but also with apatite and calcium oxalate stones. Currently, a long-term antibiotic therapy is advised in patients affected by infection stones. Antibiotic therapy should prevent not only septic complications but also recurrence or re-growth of stones after treatment. Different antibiotic modalities are recommended, sometimes together with urease inhibitors. Mid-stream urine culture is the easiest available pre-treatment parameter notwithstanding its poor predictive value. In case of suspected or proven urinary infection, an appropriate antibiotic therapy should always be administered prior to surgical procedure. There is, however, controversy regarding the antibiotic use, its role, expediency, and duration of prophylaxis in relation to the various surgical procedures, and the way infectious complications are considered and classified. When antibiotic prophylaxis is considered, its duration should be clearly established prior to surgery; duration may vary depending on the type of surgery or the type of antibiotic. Furthermore, prophylaxis should be administered only for a limited amount of time. In infection stones, in immuno-compromised patients or in patients with anatomical anomalies or diabetes, the risk of post-treatment infection and sepsis is higher Hence there is agreement on the need for prophylaxis and antibiotic therapy The most recent literature has shown excellent results with fluoroquinolones both in prophylaxis and therapy, concerning post-operative infection control after percutaneous as well as ureteroscopic removal of stones. No agreement has yet been reached on antibiotic prophylaxis modalities prior to percutaneous or ureteroscopic removal and its usefulness for SWL.