Impact of COVID-19 on the management and outcomes of ureteric stones in the UK: a multicentre retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if management of ureteric stones in the UK changed during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and whether this affected patient outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a multicentre retrospective study of adults with computed tomography-confirmed ureteric stone disease at 39 UK hospitals during a pre-pandemic period (23/3/2019-22/6/2019) and a period during the pandemic (the 3-month period after the first severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 case at individual sites). The primary outcome was success of primary treatment modality, defined as no further treatment required for the index ureteric stone. Our study protocol was published prior to data collection. RESULTS: A total of 3735 patients were included (pre-pandemic 1956 patients; pandemic 1779 patients). Stone size was similar between groups (P > 0.05). During the pandemic, patients had lower hospital admission rates (pre-pandemic 54.0% vs pandemic 46.5%, P < 0.001), shorter mean length of stay (4.1 vs 3.3 days, P = 0.02), and higher rates of use of medical expulsive therapy (17.4% vs 25.4%, P < 0.001). In patients who received interventional management (pre-pandemic 787 vs pandemic 685), rates of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (22.7% vs 34.1%, P < 0.001) and nephrostomy were higher (7.1% vs 10.5%, P = 0.03); and rates of ureteroscopy (57.2% vs 47.5%, P < 0.001), stent insertion (68.4% vs 54.6%, P < 0.001), and general anaesthetic (92.2% vs 76.2%, P < 0.001) were lower. There was no difference in success of primary treatment modality between patient cohorts (pre-pandemic 73.8% vs pandemic 76.1%, P = 0.11), nor when patients were stratified by treatment modality or stone size. Rates of operative complications, 30-day mortality, and re-admission and renal function at 6 months did not differ between the data collection periods. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there were lower admission rates and fewer invasive procedures performed. Despite this, there were no differences in treatment success or outcomes. Our findings indicate that clinicians can safely adopt management strategies developed during the pandemic to treat more patients conservatively and in the community.

Assessing the impact of MRI based diagnostics on pre-treatment disease classification and prognostic model performance in men diagnosed with new prostate cancer from an unscreened population.

INTRODUCTION: Pre-treatment risk and prognostic groups are the cornerstone for deciding management in non-metastatic prostate cancer. All however, were developed in the pre-MRI era. Here we compared categorisation of cancers using either only clinical parameters or with MRI enhanced information in men referred for suspected prostate cancer from an unscreened population. PATIENT AND METHODS: Data from men referred from primary care to our diagnostic service and with both clinical (digital rectal examination [DRE] and systematic biopsies) and MRI enhanced attributes (MRI stage and combined systematic/targeted biopsies) were used for this study. Clinical vs MRI data were contrasted for clinico-pathological and risk group re-distribution using the European Association of Urology (EAU), American Urological Association (AUA) and UK National Institute for Health Care Excellence (NICE) Cambridge Prognostic Group (CPG) models. Differences were retrofitted to a population cohort with long-term prostate cancer mortality (PCM) outcomes to simulate impact on model performance. We further contrasted individualised overall survival (OS) predictions using the Predict Prostate algorithm. RESULTS: Data from 370 men were included (median age 66y). Pre-biopsy MRI stage reassignments occurred in 7.8% (versus DRE). Image-guided biopsies increased Grade Group 2 and ≥ Grade Group 3 assignments in 2.7% and 2.9% respectively. The main change in risk groups was more high-risk cancers (6.2% increase in the EAU and AUA system, 4.3% increase in CPG4 and 1.9% CPG5). When extrapolated to a historical population-based cohort (n = 10,139) the redistribution resulted in generally lower concordance indices for PCM. The 5-tier NICE-CPG system outperformed the 4-tier AUA and 3-tier EAU models (C Index 0.70 versus 0.65 and 0.64). Using an individualised prognostic model, changes in predicted OS were small (median difference 1% and 2% at 10- and 15-years' respectively). Similarly, estimated treatment survival benefit changes were minimal (1% at both 10- and 15-years' time frame). CONCLUSION: MRI guided diagnostics does change pre-treatment risk groups assignments but the overall prognostic impact appears modest in men referred from unscreened populations. Particularly, when using more granular tiers or individualised prognostic models. Existing risk and prognostic models can continue to be used to counsel men about treatment option until long term survival outcomes are available.

A systematic review of living kidney donor enhanced recovery after surgery.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) reduces complications and shortens hospital stay without increasing readmission or mortality. However, its role in living donor nephrectomy (LDN) has not yet been defined. Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Central were searched prior to 08/01/21 for all randomized controlled and cohort studies comparing ERAS to standard of care in LDN. The study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD: CRD42019141706). One thousand, three hundred seventy-seven patients were identified from 14 studies (698 patients with ERAS and 679 patients without). There were considerable differences in the protocols used, and compliance with general ERAS recommendations was poor. Meta-analysis of laparoscopic procedures (including hand- and robot-assisted) revealed that duration of stay was significantly reduced by 0.98 days with ERAS (95% CI = 0.36-1.60, P = .002) and opiate requirement by 32.4 mg (95% CI = 1.1-63.7, P = .04). There was no significant difference n readmission rates or complications. Quality of evidence was low to moderate assessed using the GRADE tool. This review suggests there is a positive benefit of ERAS in laparoscopic LDN. However, there was considerable variation in ERAS protocols used, and the quality of evidence was low; as such, a guideline for ERAS in LDN should be developed and validated.

Percutaneous Cystolitholapaxy Using the LithoClast Trilogy for Multiple Bladder Stones.

Background: Multiple large bladder calculi are traditionally managed through open cystolithotomy or transurethrally in patients who have an open bladder neck. Open procedures are technically challenging in patients who may have had multiple previous open surgeries, and may be associated with significant morbidity in patients with a high comorbid burden. Therefore, a percutaneous approach to such stones has been used especially when there is a closed bladder neck, and has been shown to be effective. There are a number of available devices for breaking stones in these approaches, the newest of which is the LithoClast Trilogy™ (EMS, Nyon, Switzerland) device, a probe that provides ultrasonic and mechanical calculi fragmentation and suction in a single instrument. Case Presentation: We describe the first reported case of percutaneous cystolitholapaxy using the LithoClast Trilogy device in a 41-year-old woman with spina bifida, and multiple large bladder calculi with a history of ileocystoplasty and Mitrofanoff formation, and a bladder neck closure for neuropathic bladder. The calculi measured 31 and 25 mm, and had a volume of 19.6 and 7.9 cm3 and average HU of 408 and 462, respectively. The calculi were composed of 37% calcium phosphate and 63% magnesium ammonium phosphate. Conclusion: We demonstrate that this approach can be used as a viable alternative to open surgery, which is of particular importance for complex patients who have undergone multiple previous open operations, and who may have a high comorbid burden.