Perceptions of dietary factors promoting and preventing nephrolithiasis: a cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVE: To assess knowledge of both promoting and preventive dietary factors on nephrolithiasis in a diverse patient population. Precipitating factors of kidney stone disease include diet, lifestyle, socioeconomic status, and race/ethnicity. However, patient awareness of these influences is poorly described. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 24-question survey, assessing intake-related risk factors for stone disease, was administered prospectively to 1018 patients. Responses were summarized with frequency and percent. Statistical comparisons were made using a propensity scoring method in order to account for potential confounding variables. Propensity scores were stratified into quintiles. Further analysis with multiple imputation was performed to account for any missing data in the survey. The results of the propensity-adjusted log-binomial regression model are presented as prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Respondents demonstrated limited knowledge of nutrient factors that influence stone development. However, most study participants (70.3%) reported a willingness to make lifestyle changes aimed at lowering their risk for stone disease. Respondents reporting previous nephrolithiasis education were less likely to report that diet had no effect on kidney stone formation (PR = 0.795, 95% CI 0.65, 0.96, p = 0.01) The type of physician who counseled the respondent had no association with patient knowledge for stone disease (PR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.63, 1.10, p = 0.2). CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of diet-related risk factors for nephrolithiasis is limited among this population. Respondents who received prior education appeared to maintain the knowledge of dietary risk for nephrolithiasis. Participants also expressed a willingness to make requisite dietary changes if that information is provided. Given that most stone formers experience a recurrence, these findings highlight the need for more comprehensive patient education strategies on the modifiable risk factors for nephrolithiasis.

Prostate cancer presentation, treatment selection, and outcomes among men with HIV/AIDS: A clinical stage, race, and age-matched contemporary analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare the clinical presentation, treatment receipt, and oncologic outcomes between human immunodeficiency virus-seropositive (HIV+) and seronegative (HIV-) men with prostate cancer (CaP) matched by age, clinical stage, and race. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of 3,135 men treated for CaP from 2000 to 2016 was performed. HIV+ patients (N = 46) were matched 1:2 to 3 to HIV- men (N = 137) by age, race, and clinical stage. Clinicopathologic features and primary treatment received were compared between cohorts. Associations between HIV status and progression-free, cancer-specific, and overall survival were compared by HIV status using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards analysis. RESULTS: After matching, men with and without HIV were similar with respect initial prostate-specific antigen, Gleason Sum, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status. Among HIV+ men, 67.4% had a history of acquired immune deficiency syndrome, and 91.3% were on highly active antiretroviral therapy at CaP diagnosis. Among men with localized disease, HIV+ men were more likely to receive radiation (59.5% vs. 44.8%) or no therapy (13.5% vs. 4.3%) and less likely to receive surgery (16.2% vs. 30.2%), or to initiate active surveillance (10.8% vs. 16.4%; P = 0.04 overall). There were no differences in rates of clinical progression, development of castration resistance, or CaP death by HIV status. However, HIV+ status was associated with inferior overall survival (hazard ratio 2.89, P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: While most HIV+ patients had a history of acquired immune deficiency syndrome; HIV was well controlled in the majority of patients at the time of CaP diagnosis. While oncologic outcomes were similar between HIV+ and HIV- men, significant differences in treatment selection were observed. Further research is necessary to understand differences in treatment election by HIV status and to define optimal CaP treatment selection in men with HIV.

Predictive Risk Factors for Continued Smoking after the Diagnosis of a Genitourinary Malignancy.

OBJECTIVE: To determine risk factors for continued smoking following a diagnosis of a genitourinary (GU) malignancy. Smoking is a well established risk factor in the development of cancers involving the GU tract. Unfortunately, a large percentage of patients continue to smoke or relapse after cancer diagnosis; by doing so, there is an increased risk of recurrence, poor survival rates, treatment complications, secondary primary cancers, and other chronic smoking related illnesses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred and five patients who presented to a Urologic Oncology clinic at a single tertiary treatment center were given smoking cessation counseling and pharmacotherapy, as well as a questionnaire which was used to identify smoking status, demographics, and behavioral/psychosocial characteristics. Patients were followed for a minimum of 1 year with a median length of follow up for 13 months. RESULTS: 91% of patients enrolled in the study continued smoking at survey completion. After accounting for age, ethnicity, education and cigarettes consumed/day, 5 variables were independently associated with an increased risk of continued smoking: smoking 20 or more cigarettes per day, less than 2 prior quit attempts, anxiety and/or depression, fear of cancer recurrence, and home secondhand smoke exposure. CONCLUSION: The role of the urologist is imperative for encouraging smoking cessation. While every patient should receive adequate counseling regarding smoking at the time of a GU malignancy diagnosis, identifying patients with the risk factors noted in this study and augmenting smoking cessation efforts may result in stronger efforts to quit and prevention of long-term complications.

Recent advancements in penile prosthetics.

Since the original inflatable penile prosthesis in the 1970s, several enhancements to penile prosthesis implant design, implant surgical technique, and post-operative care have been developed to increase overall patient (and partner) satisfaction rates. We, in this communication, seek to discuss these advancements and the overall impact in combating erectile dysfunction. As we continue to pursue avenues of effective and definitive treatment modalities for erectile dysfunction refractory to medical therapy, rates of infection and mechanical failure will hopefully continue to decline in the perioperative setting.