Flexible Ureterorenoscopy for Treatment of Kidney Stones: Establishment as Primary Standard Therapy in a Tertiary Stone Center.

INTRODUCTION: To analyze the primary stone free rate (pSFR) of flexible ureterorenoscopy (fURS) in the treatment of renal stones and to identify clinical predictors for the primary freedom from renal stones. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred and seventy five patients, who underwent fURS for kidney stones were analyzed. RESULTS: Index stone size was 6 mm. The stone was located in the lower calyx in 48%. Ureteral access sheath was used in 97%. Operation time was 35 min and primary stone clearance was 83%. pSFR increased from 74% in 2012 to 83% in 2013 and 90% in 2014 (p = 0.001). Preoperative stenting, index stone size, cumulative stone size, lithotripsy, ureteral access sheath and operation time were significantly correlated with the pSFR by univariate analysis. Multivariate regression analysis showed index stone size, cumulative stone size, ureteral access sheath and operation time as independent parameters for pSFR. CONCLUSIONS: fURS for kidney stones is safe with a high pSFR. Clinical parameters for pSFR are stone size, use of ureteral access sheath and operation time. In future, the effective use of fURS for the removal of kidney stones needs to be checked by prospective randomized trials.

[Urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer-data from 17,149 patients from 125 certified centers]. / Harninkontinenz nach radikaler Prostatektomie beim Prostatakarzinom ­ aktuelle Daten von 17.149 Patienten aus 125 zertifizierten Zentren.

BACKGROUND: In addition to erectile dysfunction, urinary incontinence is the most common functional limitation after radical prostatectomy (RPE) for prostate cancer (PCa). The German S3 guideline recommends informing patients about possible effects of the therapy options, including incontinence. However, only little data on continence from routine care in German-speaking countries after RPE are currently available, which makes it difficult to inform patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work is to present data on the frequency and severity of urinary incontinence after RPE from routine care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Information from the PCO (Prostate Cancer Outcomes) study is used, which was collected between 2016 and 2022 in 125 German Cancer Society (DKG)-certified prostate cancer centers in 17,149 patients using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite Short Form (EPIC-26). Changes in the "incontinence" score before (T0) and 12 months after RPE (T1) and the proportion of patients who used pads, stratified by age and risk group, are reported. RESULTS: The average score for urinary incontinence (value range: 0-worst possible to 100-best possible) was 93 points at T0 and 73 points 12 months later. At T0, 97% of the patients did not use a pad, compared to 56% at T1. 43% of the patients who did not use a pad before surgery used at least one pad a day 12 months later, while 13% use two or more. The proportion of patients using pads differs by age and risk classification. CONCLUSION: The results provide a comprehensive insight into functional outcome 12 months after RPE and can be taken into account when informing patients.

Prediction models of incontinence and sexual function one year after radical prostatectomy based on data from 20 164 prostate cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Incontinence and sexual dysfunction are long-lasting side effects after surgical treatment (radical prostatectomy, RP) of prostate cancer (PC). For an informed treatment decision, physicians and patients should discuss expected impairments. Therefore, this paper firstly aims to develop and validate prognostic models that predict incontinence and sexual function of PC patients one year after RP and secondly to provide an online decision making tool. METHODS: Observational cohorts of PC patients treated between July 2016 and March 2021 in Germany were used. Models to predict functional outcomes one year after RP measured by the EPIC-26 questionnaire were developed using lasso regression, 80-20 splitting of the data set and 10-fold cross validation. To assess performance, R2, RMSE, analysis of residuals and calibration-in-the-large were applied. Final models were externally temporally validated. Additionally, percentages of functional impairment (pad use for incontinence and firmness of erection for sexual score) per score decile were calculated to be used together with the prediction models. RESULTS: For model development and internal as well as external validation, samples of 11 355 and 8 809 patients were analysed. Results from the internal validation (incontinence: R2 = 0.12, RMSE = 25.40, sexual function: R2 = 0.23, RMSE = 21.44) were comparable with those of the external validation. Residual analysis and calibration-in-the-large showed good results. The prediction tool is freely accessible: https://nora-tabea.shinyapps.io/EPIC-26-Prediction/. CONCLUSION: The final models showed appropriate predictive properties and can be used together with the calculated risks for specific functional impairments. Main strengths are the large study sample (> 20 000) and the inclusion of an external validation. The models incorporate meaningful and clinically available predictors ensuring an easy implementation. All predictions are displayed together with risks of frequent impairments such as pad use or erectile dysfunction such that the developed online tool provides a detailed and informative overview for clinicians as well as patients.