Radical Prostatectomy for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer in Renal Transplant Recipients: Outcomes for a Large Contemporary Cohort and a Matched Comparison to Patients Without a Transplant.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: It is unknown whether renal transplant receipt (RTR) status can affect perioperative and oncological outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP). Our aim was to evaluate oncological and functional outcomes of RTR patients treated with RP for cN0M0 prostate cancer (PCa) via comparison with a no-RTR cohort. METHODS: RTR patients who had undergone RP at seven European institutions during 2001-2022 were identified. A multi-institutional cohort of no-RTR patients treated with RP during 2004-2022 served as the comparator group. Propensity score matching (PSM) at a ratio of 1:4 was used to match no-RTR patients to the RTR cohort according to age, prostate-specific antigen, and final pathology features. We used Kaplan-Meier plots and multivariable Cox, logistic, and Poisson log-linear regression models to test the outcomes of interest. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: After PSM, we analyzed data for 102 RTR and 408 no-RTR patients. RTR patients experienced higher estimated blood loss (EBL), longer length of hospital stay (LOS) and time to catheter removal, higher postoperative complication rates, and a lower continence recovery rate (all p < 0.001). On multivariable analyses, RTR independently predicted unfavorable operative time (odds ratio [OR] 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-1.25), LOS (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.32-1.86), EBL (OR 2.24, 95% CI 2.18-2.30), and time to catheter removal (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.68-2.21), but not complications or continence recovery. There were no significant differences for any oncological outcomes (biochemical recurrence, local or systemic progression) between the RTR and no-RTR groups. While no PCa deaths were recorded, the overall mortality rate was significantly higher in the RTR group (17% vs 0.5%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Although RP is feasible for RTR patients, the procedure poses non-negligible surgical challenges, with longer operative time and LOS and higher EBL, but no major differences in terms of complications and continence recovery. The RTR group had similar oncological outcomes to the no-RTR group but significantly higher overall mortality related to causes other than PCa. Therefore, careful selection for RP is required among candidates with previous RTR. PATIENT SUMMARY: Removal of the prostate for prostate cancer is possible in patients who have had a kidney transplant, and cancer control outcomes are comparable to those for the general population. However, transplant patients have a higher risk of death from causes other than prostate cancer and the prostate surgery is likely to be more challenging.

Benefits and Harms of Benign Prostatic Obstruction Treatments in Renal Transplanted Patients.

CONTEXT: In an increasingly ageing transplant population, timely management of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) is key to preventing complications that result in graft dysfunction or compromise survival. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate benefits/harms of BPO treatments in transplant patients by reviewing current literature. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A computerised bibliographic search of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases was performed for studies reporting outcomes on BPO treatments in transplanted patients. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 5021 renal transplants (RTs) performed between 1990 and 2016 were evaluated. BPO incidence was 1.61 per 1000 population per year. Overall, 264 men underwent intervention. The mean age was 58.4 yr (27-73 yr). In all, 169 patients underwent surgery (n = 114 transurethral resection of the prostate [TURP]/n = 55 transurethral incision of the prostate [TUIP]) and 95 were treated with an un-named alpha-blocker (n = 46) or doxazosin (n = 49). There was no correlation between prostate volume and treatment modality (mean prostate size = 26 cc in the surgical group where reported and 48 cc in the medical group). The mean follow-up was 31.2 mo (2-192 mo). The time from RT to BPO treatment was reported in six studies (mean: 15.4 mo, range: 0-156 mo). The time on dialysis before RT was recorded in only three studies (mean: 47.3 mo, range: 0-288 mo). There was a mean improvement in creatinine after intervention from 2.17 to 1.77 mg/dl. A total of 157 men showed an improvement in the International Prostate Symptom Score (from 18.26 to 6.89), and there was a significant reduction in postvoid residual volume in 199 (mean fall 90.6 ml). Flow improved by a mean of 10 ml/s following intervention in 199 patients. Complications included acute urinary retention (4.1%), urinary tract infections (8.4%), bladder neck contracture (2.2%), and urethral strictures (6.9%). The mean reoperation rate was 1.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Current literature is heterogeneous and of low-level evidence. Despite this, alpha-blockers, TUIP, and TURP showed a beneficial increase in the peak urinary flow and reduced symptoms in transplants patients with BPO. Improvement in the mean graft creatinine was noted after intervention. Complications were under-reported. A multicentre comparative cohort study is needed to draw firm conclusions about the ideal treatment for BPO in RT patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at the outcomes for transplant patients undergoing medical or surgical management of benign prostatic obstruction. Although the literature was very heterogeneous, we found that medical management and surgery with transurethral resection/incision of the prostate are beneficial for improving urinary flow and bothersome symptoms. We conclude that further prospective studies are required for better clarity about timing and modality of intervention in transplant patients.

The impact of single-use digital flexible cystoscope for double J removal on hospital costs and work organization: A multicentric evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Isiris-α® is a single-use digital flexible cystoscope with an integrated grasper designed for double J (DJ) stent removal. Aim of this study was to conduct a multicentric evaluation of the costs and criticalities of stent removals performed with Isiris®-α in different hospitals and health systems, as compared to other DJ removal procedures. METHODS: After gathering 10 institutions worldwide with experience on Isiris-α®, we performed an analysis of the reported costs of DJ removal with Isiris-α®, as compared to the traditional reusable equipment used in each institution. The cost evaluation included instrument purchase, Endoscopic Room (EnR)/ Operatory Room (OR) occupancy, medical staff, instrument disposal, maintenance, repairs, decontamination or sterilization of reusable devices. RESULTS: The main factor affecting the costs of the procedure was OR/EnR occupancy. Decontamination and sterilization accounted for a less important part of total costs. Isiris-α® was more profitable in institutions where DJ removal is usually performed in the EnR/OR, allowing to transfer the procedure to outpatient clinic, with a significant cost saving and EnR/OR time saving to be allocated to other activities. In the only institution where DJ removal was already performed in outpatient clinics, there is a slight cost difference in favor of reusable instruments in high-volume institutions, given a sufficient number to guarantee the turnover. CONCLUSION: Isiris-α® leads to significant cost benefit in the institutions where DJ removal is routinely performed in EnR/OR, and brings significant improvement in organization, cost impact and turnover.

Active surveillance in renal transplant patients with prostate cancer: a multicentre analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Due to medical improvements leading to increased life expectancy after renal transplantation and widened eligibility criteria allowing older patients to be transplanted, incidence of (low-risk) prostate cancer (PCa) is increasing among renal transplant recipients (RTR). It remains to be established whether active surveillance (AS) for PCa represents a safe treatment option in this setting. Therefore, we aim to compare AS discontinuation and oncological outcomes of AS for PCa of RTR vs. non-transplant patients. METHODS: Multicentre study including RTR diagnosed with PCa between 2008 and 2018 in whom AS was initiated. A subgroup of non-RTR from the St. Antonius hospital AS cohort was used as a control group. Comparison of RTR vs. non-RTR was performed by 2:1 propensity score matched survival analysis. Outcome measures included tumour progression-free survival, treatment-free survival, metastasis rates, biochemical recurrence rates and overall survival. Patients were matched based on age, year of diagnosis, PSA, biopsy ISUP grade group, relative number of positive biopsy cores and clinical stage. RESULTS: A total of 628 patients under AS were evaluated, including 17 RTRs and 611 non-RTRs. A total of 13 RTR cases were matched with 24 non-RTR cases. Median overall follow-up for the RTR and non-RTR matched cases was, respectively, 5.1 (IQR 3.2-8.7) years and 5.7 (IQR 4.8-8.1) years. There were no events of metastasis and biochemical recurrence among matched cases. The matched-pair analysis results in a 1-year and 5-year survival of the RTR and non-RTR patients were, respectively, 100 vs. 92%, and 39 vs. 76% for tumour progression, 100 vs. 91% and 59 vs. 76% for treatment-free survival and, respectively, 100 vs. 100% and 88 vs. 100% for overall survival. No significant differences in tumour progression-free survival (p = 0.07) and treatment-free survival were observed (p = 0.3). However, there was a significant difference in overall survival comparing both groups (p = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: AS may be carefully considered in RTR with low-risk PCa. In our preliminary analysis, no major differences were present in AS outcomes between RTR and non-RTR. Overall mortality was significantly higher in the RTR subgroup.

Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Interventions on Nephrolithiasis in Transplanted Kidney.

CONTEXT: De Novo nephrolithiasis in renal transplant can have severe consequences since renal transplantation involves a single functioning kidney with medical and anatomical specificities (heterotopic transplantation on iliac vessels, immunosuppressive treatments, and comorbidities). OBJECTIVE: To systematically review all available evidence on the prevalence of de novo nephrolithiasis in renal transplant, presentation, and stone characteristics, and to report in a meta-analysis the efficacy of stone treatments (extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy [ESWL], medical treatment, percutaneous nephrolithotomy [PCNL], open surgery, and ureteroscopy). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched up to November 2021 for all relevant publications reporting the management of de novo nephrolithiasis in renal allografts. The primary outcome was stone-free rate (SFR) at 3 mo. Secondary outcomes included prevalence, stone characteristics (size, density, and composition), symptoms on presentation, need for drainage, complications, and recurrence. Data were narratively synthesized in light of methodological and clinical heterogeneity, and a meta-analysis was performed for SFR. The risk of bias of each included study was assessed. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We included 37 retrospective studies with 553 patients and 612 procedures; of the 612 procedures 20 were antegrade ureteroscopy, 154 retrograde ureteroscopy, 118 PCNL, 25 open surgery, 155 ESWL, and 140 surveillance/medical treatment. The prevalence of nephrolithiasis in renal transplant was 1.0%. The mean stone size on diagnosis was 11 mm (2-50). The overall SFR at 3 mo was 82%: 96% with open surgery, 95% with antegrade ureteroscopy, 86% with PCNL, 81% with retrograde ureteroscopy, and 75% with ESWL. CONCLUSIONS: De novo nephrolithiasis in renal transplant is an infrequent condition. A high SFR were obtained with an antegrade approach (ureteroscopy, PCNL, and open approach) that should be considered in renal transplant patients owing to the heterotopic position of the renal graft. The choice of technique was correlated with stone size: generally ureteroscopy and ESWL for stones 11-12 mm (mean stone size) versus PCNL and open surgery for 17-25 mm stones. PATIENT SUMMARY: De novo nephrolithiasis in renal transplants is an infrequent situation that can have severe consequences on the function of the renal graft. We evaluated the efficacy of each treatment and noted that antegrade approaches (open surgery, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and antegrade ureteroscopy) were associated with the highest stone-free rate. As opposed to the management of nephrolithiasis in native kidney, an antegrade approach should be considered more in renal transplant patients.

Robotic Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer in Renal Transplant Recipients: Results from a Multicenter Series.

BACKGROUND: Despite an expected increase in prostate cancer (PCa) incidence in the renal transplant recipient (RTR) population in the near future, robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in these patients has been poorly detailed. It is not well understood whether results are comparable to RARP in the non-RTR setting. OBJECTIVE: To describe the surgical technique for RARP in RTR and report results from our multi-institutional experience. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a retrospective review of the experience of four referral centers. SURGICAL PROCEDURE: Transperitoneal RARP with pelvic lymph node dissection in selected patients. MEASUREMENTS: We measured patient, PCa, and graft baseline features; intraoperative and postoperative parameters; complications, (Clavien classification); and oncological and functional outcomes. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: We included 41 men. The median age, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, preoperative renal function, and prostate-specific antigen were 60 yr (interquartile range [IQR] 57-64), 2 points (IQR 2-3), 45 ml/min (IQR 30-62), and 6.5 ng/ml (IQR 5.2-10.2), respectively. Four men (9.8%) had a biopsy Gleason score >7. The majority of the patients (70.7%) did not undergo lymphadenectomy. The median operating time, hospital stay, and catheterization time were 201 min (IQR 170-250), 4 d (IQR 2-6), and 10 d (IQR 7-13), respectively. At final pathology, 11 men had extraprostatic extension and seven had positive surgical margins. At median follow-up of 42 mo (IQR 24-65), four men had biochemical recurrence, including one case of local PCa persistence and one local recurrence. No metastases were recorded while two patients died from non-PCa-related causes. Continence was preserved in 86.1% (p not applicable) and erections in 64.7% (p = 0.0633) of those who were continent/potent before the procedure. Renal function remained unchanged (p = 0.08). No intraoperative complications and one major (Clavien 3a) complication were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: RARP in RTR is safe and feasible. Overall, operative, oncological, and functional outcomes are comparable to those described for the non-RTR setting, with graft injury remaining undescribed. Further research is needed to confirm our findings. PATIENT SUMMARY: Robot-assisted removal of the prostate is safe and feasible in patients who have a kidney transplant. Cancer control, urinary and sexual function results, and surgical complications seem to be similar to those for patients without a transplant, but further research is needed.

How crises work: A model of error cause and effect in surgical practice.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical crises have major consequences for patients, staff and healthcare institutions. Nevertheless, their aetiology and evolution are poorly understood outside the remit of root-cause analyses. AIMS: To develop a crisis model in surgery in order to aid the reporting and management of safety critical events. METHODS: A narrative review surveyed the safety literature on failure causes, mechanisms and effects in the context of surgical crises. Sources were identified using non-probability sampling, with selection and inclusion being determined by author panel consensus. The data underwent thematic analysis and reporting followed the recommendation of the SALSA framework. RESULTS: Data from 133 sources derived five principal themes. Analysis suggested that surgical care processes become destabilized in a step-wise manner. This crisis chain is initiated by four categories of threat or risk: (i) the systems in which surgeons operate; (ii) surgeons' technical, cognitive and behavioural skills; (iii) surgeons' physiological and psychological state (operational condition); and (iv) professional culture. Once triggered, the crisis chain is driven by only three types of errors: Type I. Performance errors consist of failures to diagnose, plan or execute tasks; Type II. Awareness errors are failures to recognise, comprehend or extrapolate the impact of performance failures; Type III. Rescue errors represent failures to correct faulty performance. The co-occurrence of all three error types gives rise to harm, which can lead to a crisis in the absence of mitigating actions. CONCLUSION: Surgical crises may be triggered by four categories of threat and driven by only three types of error. These may represent universal targets for safety interventions that create new opportunities for crisis management.

Long-term urology outcomes of anorectal malformation.

INTRODUCTION: Urological problems are a recognised feature of anorectal malformation (ARM). Previous assumptions of favourable long-term urinary outcomes are being challenged. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesised that urinary tract problems are common in ARM and frequently persist into adulthood. We retrospectively reviewed long-term renal and bladder outcomes in ARM patients. STUDY DESIGN: Patients with ARM born between 1984-2005 were identified from electronic hospital databases. Their case notes were reviewed. Renal outcomes included serum creatinine and the need for renal replacement therapy. Bladder outcomes included symptom review, bladder medication, need for intermittent catheterisation, videourodynamics and whether the patient had undergone augmentation cystoplasty. RESULT (TABLE 1): The case notes of 50 patients were reviewed. The median age at last follow up was 18 years (range 12-34 years). The level of fistula was noted to be high in 17 patients, intermediate in eight, and low in 10. Four had cloaca. Congenital urological abnormalities were present in 25 (50%). An abnormal spinal cord was present in 22 (44%) patients. VACTERL association occurred in 27 (54%). Chronic kidney disease stage II or above was found in 14 (28%) patients, of whom four required a renal transplant. Abnormal bladder outcomes were found in 39 (78%) patients. Augmentation cystoplasty with Mitrofanoff had been performed in 12. Of those who had not undergone cystoplasty, 17 had urinary symptoms, including urinary incontinence in 12. Of the 39 patients with abnormal bladder outcome, 19 (49%) did not have a spinal cord abnormality. There was no significant statistical association between level of ARM and abnormal renal outcome or presence of bladder abnormality. DISCUSSION: Adverse renal and bladder outcomes are common in our cohort of young people with ARM with a significantly higher incidence compared with current literature. We did not demonstrate an association between level of ARM or presence of spinal cord anomaly with persistent bladder problems. Congenital urological anomalies are more common in those who later have an abnormal renal outcome. Although this difference is statistically significant, one fifth of patients born with anatomically normal upper tracts develop reduced renal function, implying an important acquired component. CONCLUSION: Bladder problems and reduced renal function affect a significant proportion of young adults with ARM. Neither adverse outcome is reliably predicted from ARM level, congenital urological anomaly or spinal cord anomaly. We advise continued long-term bladder and kidney follow-up for all patients with ARM.

Prostate Cancer in Renal Transplant Recipients: Results from a Large Contemporary Cohort.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the natural history of prostate cancer (PCa) in renal transplant recipients (RTRs) and to clarify the controversy over whether RTRs have a higher risk of PCa and poorer outcomes than non-RTRs, due to factors such as immunosuppression. Patients and Methods: We performed a retrospective multicenter study of RTRs diagnosed with cM0 PCa between 2001 and 2019. Primary outcomes were overall (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Secondary outcomes included biochemical recurrence and/or progression after active surveillance (AS) and evaluation of variables possibly influencing PCa aggressiveness and outcomes. Management modalities included surgery, radiation, cryotherapy, HIFU, AS, and watchful waiting. Results: We included 166 men from nine institutions. Median age and eGFR at diagnosis were 67 (IQR 60−73) and 45.9 mL/min (IQR 31.5−63.4). ASA score was >2 in 58.4% of cases. Median time from transplant to PCa diagnosis was 117 months (IQR 48−191.5), and median PSA at diagnosis was 6.5 ng/mL (IQR 5.02−10). The biopsy Gleason score was ≥8 in 12.8%; 11.6% and 6.1% patients had suspicion of ≥cT3 > cT2 and cN+ disease. The most frequent management method was radical prostatectomy (65.6%), followed by radiation therapy (16.9%) and AS (10.2%). At a median follow-up of 60.5 months (IQR 31−106) 22.9% of men (n = 38) died, with only n = 4 (2.4%) deaths due to PCa. Local and systemic progression rates were 4.2% and 3.0%. On univariable analysis, no major influence of immunosuppression type was noted, with the exception of a protective effect of antiproliferative agents (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.16−0.97, p = 0.04) associated with a decreased risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR) or progression after AS. Conclusion: PCa diagnosed in RTRs is mainly of low to intermediate risk and organ-confined at diagnosis, with good cancer control and low PCa death at intermediate follow-up. RTRs have a non-negligible risk of death from causes other than PCa. Aggressive upfront management of the majority of RTRs with PCa may, therefore, be avoided.

Safety of "hot" and "cold" site admissions within a high-volume urology department in the United Kingdom at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the safety of urological admissions and procedures during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic using "hot" and "cold" sites. The secondary objective is to determine risk factors of contracting COVID-19 within our cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of all consecutive patients admitted from March 1 to May 31, 2020 at a high-volume tertiary urology department in London, United Kingdom. Elective surgery was carried out at a "cold" site requiring a negative COVID-19 swab 72-hours prior to admission and patients were required to self-isolate for 14-days preoperatively, while all acute admissions were admitted to the "hot" site.Complications related to COVID-19 were presented as percentages. Risk factors for developing COVID-19 infection were determined using multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 611 patients, 451 (73.8%) male and 160 (26.2%) female, with a median age of 57 (interquartile range 44-70) were admitted under the urology team; 101 (16.5%) on the "cold" site and 510 (83.5%) on the "hot" site. Procedures were performed in 495 patients of which eight (1.6%) contracted COVID-19 postoperatively with one (0.2%) postoperative mortality due to COVID-19. Overall, COVID-19 was detected in 20 (3.3%) patients with two (0.3%) deaths. Length of stay was associated with contracting COVID-19 in our cohort (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.13-1.39). CONCLUSIONS: Continuation of urological procedures using "hot" and "cold" sites throughout the COVID-19 pandemic was safe practice, although the risk of COVID-19 remained and is underlined by a postoperative mortality.

Continuity of Cancer Care: The Surgical Experience of Two Large Cancer Hubs in London and Milan.

The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic is having a large effect on the management of cancer patients. This study reports on the approach and outcomes of cancer patients receiving radical surgery with curative intent between March and September 2020 (in comparison to 2019) in the European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS (IEO) in Milan and the South East London Cancer Alliance (SELCA). Both institutions implemented a COVID-19 minimal pathway where patients were required to self-isolate prior to admission and were swabbed for COVID-19 within 72 h of surgery. Positive patients had surgery deferred until a negative swab. At IEO, radical surgeries declined by 6% as compared to the same period in 2019 (n = 1477 vs. 1560, respectively). Readmissions were required for 3% (n = 41), and <1% (n = 9) developed COVID-19, of which only one had severe disease and died. At SELCA, radical surgeries declined by 34% (n = 1553 vs. 2336). Readmissions were required for 11% (n = 36), <1% (n = 7) developed COVID-19, and none died from it. Whilst a decline in number of surgeries was observed in both centres, the implemented COVID-19 minimal pathways have shown to be safe for cancer patients requiring radical treatment, with limited complications and almost no COVID-19 infections.

Management of Renal Cell Carcinoma and Other Renal Masses in the Kidney Graft.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Renal masses in the kidney graft pose an important clinical dilemma, balancing graft function against the need for cancer control. RECENT FINDINGS: Donor origin cancers in the renal graft can be classified as 'donor transmitted' or 'donor derived'. The landmark TracerX Renal changed our understanding of renal cell carcinoma oncogenesis, demonstrating that key mutations in childhood lead to clinically apparent tumours in later life. Identified pre-operatively, contemporary evidence suggests that masses excised prior to transplantation result in acceptable oncologic safety and graft function. Identified post-operatively management mirrors that for a mass in a solitary kidney in the non-transplant population, with focus on a nephron-sparing approach. With growing number of kidney transplants each year, ageing donors, and increasing graft survival, masses in the renal graft are likely to become a more prevalent clinical conundrum.

The MIC-KEY button vesicostomy: a superior alternative for suprapubic drainage?

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the MIC-KEY button vesicostomy as an alternative to indwelling suprapubic catheters (SPCs) for bladder drainage in adults. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Phase II pilot study prospectively evaluating patients with indwelling SPCs that were converted to MIC-KEY buttons, or cystoscopic-guided de novo insertion, between November 2014 and February 2019. In all, 15 patients (14 female, one male) had indwelling SPCs that had conversion or attempted conversion to MIC-KEY button, and one (male) had a cystoscopic-guided de novo insertion with a history of previous suprapubic catheterisation. The mean (range) age was 44.2 (13-73) years. Catheter-related quality-of-life (C-IQoL) questionnaire data were collected at baseline and 3 months. RESULTS: Two patients had attempted conversion but were abandoned perioperatively due to sizing issues and insertion difficulties, respectively. Three patients were subsequently converted back to a SPC; due to button sizing (18 days), leaking (3 months), and recurrent infection (13 months). The remaining 11 patients have remained well with continued drainage via the MIC-KEY button; mean (range) duration since conversion was 34.2 (5-105) months. The C-IQoL score improved 3 months after insertion, from 50.0 to 75.4. Changes were performed dependent on patient's personalised management, typically every 3 months, under local or general anaesthetic. CONCLUSION: The MIC-KEY button is a safe alternative to SPC drainage in adults in the short- to medium-term, in a selected cohort.

Prophylaxis of Wound Infections-antibiotics in Renal Donation (POWAR): A UK Multicentre Double Blind Placebo Controlled Randomised Trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative infection after hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (HALDN) confers significant morbidity to a healthy patient group. Current UK guidelines cite a lack of evidence for routine antibiotic prophylaxis. This trial assessed if a single preoperative antibiotic dose could reduce post HALDN infections. METHODS: Eligible donors were randomly and blindly allocated to preoperative single-dose intravenous co-amoxiclav or saline. The primary composite endpoint was clinical evidence of any postoperative infection at 30 days, including surgical site infection (SSI), urinary tract infection (UTI), and lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI). FINDINGS: In all, 293 participants underwent HALDN (148 antibiotic arm and 145 placebo arm). Among them, 99% (291/293) completed follow-up. The total infection rate was 40.7% (59/145) in the placebo group and 23% (34 of 148) in the antibiotic group (P = 0.001). Superficial SSIs were 20.7% (30/145 patients) in the placebo group versus 10.1% (15/148 patients) in the antibiotic group (P = 0.012). LRTIs were 9% (13/145) in the placebo group and 3.4% (5/148) in the antibiotic group (P = 0.046). UTIs were 4.1% (6/145) in the placebo group and 3.4% (5/148) in the antibiotic group (P = 0.72).Antibiotic prophylaxis conferred a 17.7% (95% confidence interval 7.2%-28.1%), absolute risk reduction in developing postoperative infection, with 6 donors requiring treatment to prevent 1 infection. INTERPRETATION: Single-dose preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis dramatically reduces post-HALDN infection rates, mainly impacting SSIs and LRTIs.

Effectiveness and Harms of Using Kidneys with Small Renal Tumors from Deceased or Living Donors as a Source of Renal Transplantation: A Systematic Review.

CONTEXT: Kidney transplantation is the best treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease. Incidence of small renal masses (SRMs), which most frequently are renal cell carcinomas (RCCs), is highest in patients aged >60 yr. The increasing age of donors can lead to the diagnosis of a higher number of SRMs when assessing the patient for transplantation, and so can theoretically decrease the number of kidneys suitable for transplantation. Aiming to increase the pool of kidneys suitable for transplantation, a number of studies have reported their experience using kidneys with SRMs for transplantation. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review all available evidence on the effectiveness and harm of using kidneys with SRMs as a source of transplantation. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A computerized bibliographic search of the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases was performed for all studies reporting outcomes of adult renal transplantation using kidneys with SRMs. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Nineteen studies enrolling 109 patients were included and synthesized narratively. The mean recipient age was 44.2 yr, and kidneys used were retrieved from living donors in 86% (94/109) of cases. Tumor excision was performed ex vivo in all cases except for two. The vast majority of excised tumors were RCCs (88/109 patients), and clear-cell subtype was most common. The mean tumor size was 2cm (range 0.5-6.0cm) and tumor grade was G1-G2 in 93% (75/81) of patients. With a mean follow-up of 39.9 mo, overall survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 yr were 97.7%, 95.4%, and 92%, respectively, and the mean graft survival rates 99.2%, 95%, and 95.6%, respectively. Only one local relapse occurred 9 yr after transplantation, which was managed conservatively. Functional outcomes, although infrequently reported, appear to be similar to those of conventional transplants, with 1.6% of these patients needing reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: The current literature, although with low-level evidence, suggests that kidneys with excised SRMs are an acceptable source of transplantation without compromising oncological outcomes and with similar functional outcomes to other donor kidneys. PATIENT SUMMARY: Renal transplantation using a kidney with a small renal mass does not appear to increase the risk of cancer recurrence and can be a good option for selected patients after appropriate counseling and allocation.

Comparison Between Robotic and Laparoscopic or Open Anastomoses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Robotic surgery has been increasingly used in fashioning various surgical anastomoses. Our aim was to collect and analyze outcomes related to anastomoses performed using a robotic approach and compare them with those done using laparoscopic or open approaches through meta-analysis. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted for articles comparing robotic with laparoscopic and/or open operations (colectomy, low anterior resection, gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), pancreaticoduodenectomy, radical cystectomy, pyeloplasty, radical prostatectomy, renal transplant) published up to June 2019 searching Medline, Scopus, Google Scholar, Clinical Trials and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Studies containing information about outcomes related to hand-sewn anastomoses were included for meta-analysis. Studies with stapled anastomoses or without relevant information about the anastomotic technique were excluded. We also excluded studies in which the anastomoses were performed extracorporeally in laparoscopic or robotic operations. RESULTS: We included 83 studies referring to the aforementioned operations (4 randomized controlled and 79 non-randomized, 10 prospective and 69 retrospective) apart from colectomy and low anterior resection. Anastomoses done using robotic instruments provided similar results to those done using laparoscopic or open approach in regards to anastomotic leak or stricture. However, there were lower rates of stenosis in robotic than in laparoscopic RYGB (p=0.01) and in robotic than in open radical prostatectomy (p<0.00001). Moreover, all anastomoses needed more time to be performed using the robotic rather than the open approach in renal transplant (p≤0.001). CONCLUSION: Robotic anastomoses provide equal outcomes with laparoscopic and open ones in most operations, with a few notable exceptions.

Outcomes in Third and Fourth Kidney Transplants Based on the Type of Donor.

BACKGROUND: An increasing number of patients are requiring multiple retransplants. We assessed outcomes of third and fourth kidney transplants, to aid decision making on the most suitable donor type. METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively for 2561 transplants, including 69 third and 8 fourth, performed from 2000 to 2017. Demographics and outcomes for the combined third/fourth group were compared to first and second transplants. Within the third/fourth kidney transplant group, comparisons were made between deceased donors (n = 39), live donor HLA-compatible (n = 23) and -incompatible (n = 13) transplants, as well as between standard (n = 25) and extended-criteria (n = 14) deceased donor transplants. RESULTS: Patient survival did not differ significantly by transplant number (P = 0.532), whereas death-censored graft survival declined progressively, from 89% at 5 years in first, 85% in second and 74% in the third/fourth transplant group (P < 0.001). Within the combined third/fourth transplant subgroup, 5-year graft survival was found to be 100% in recipients of HLA-compatible live donors, compared to 75% in deceased donors and 53% in HLA-incompatible live donors, although this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.083). No significant difference in patient survival (P = 0.356) or complication rates (P = 0.757) were detected between these groups. For recipients of deceased donors in the third/fourth transplant group, there were no significant differences between standard versus extended-criteria donors for any of the outcomes considered. CONCLUSIONS: Despite variable functional outcomes, third and fourth kidney transplant recipients experience comparable patient survival rates to first and second transplants, regardless of the donor type. In selected patients, HLA-incompatible live donors and extended-criteria deceased donors should be considered.

European Association of Urology Guidelines on Renal Transplantation: Update 2018.

CONTEXT: The European Association of Urology (EAU) panel on renal transplantation (RT) has released an updated version of the RT guidelines. OBJECTIVE: To present the 2018 EAU guidelines on RT. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A broad and comprehensive scoping exercise was performed, encompassing all areas of RT guidelines published between January 1, 2007, and May 31, 2016. Databases covered by the search included Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Libraries. Previous guidelines were updated, and levels of evidence and grades of recommendation were assigned. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: It is strongly recommended to offer pure or hand-assisted laparoscopic/retroperitoneoscopic surgery as the preferential technique for living donor nephrectomy. Decisions on the acceptance of a donor organ should not be based on histological findings alone since this might lead to an unnecessarily high rate of discarded grafts. For ureterovesical anastomosis, a Lich-Gregoir-like extravesical technique protected by a ureteral stent is the preferred technique for minimisation of urinary tract complications. It is also strongly recommended to perform initial rejection prophylaxis with a combination therapy comprising a calcineurin inhibitor (preferably tacrolimus), mycophenolate, steroids, and an induction agent (either basiliximab or anti-thymocyte globulin). The long version of the guidelines is available at the EAU website (http://uroweb.org/guidelines). CONCLUSIONS: These abridged EAU guidelines present updated information on the clinical and surgical management of RT for incorporation into clinical practice. PATIENT SUMMARY: The European Association of Urology has released the renal transplantation guidelines. The implementation of minimally invasive surgery for organ retrieval and the latest evidence on transplant surgery as well as on immunosuppressive regimens are key factors for minimisation of rejection and achievement of long-term graft survival.

Management of Localised Prostate Cancer in Kidney Transplant Patients: A Systematic Review from the EAU Guidelines on Renal Transplantation Panel.

CONTEXT: Cancer development after kidney transplant (KT) has become a major problem, and currently, it is one of the primary causes of death in this population. Urological cancers after KT such as prostate cancer (PCa) have also increased, partly due to the increasing age of recipients and prolonged survival. PCa is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer in men, accounting for 15% of all cancers. Managing localised PCa after KT remains challenging because of treating an immunosuppressed patient with a kidney graft in the pelvic cavity. Several papers reporting PCa treatment after KT have been published. Merging all the available data and summarising most important evidence could be useful for scientific community involved in this issue. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review all the available evidence in literature regarding the management of localised PCa after KT. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Computerised bibliographic search of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases was performed for all studies reporting outcomes of localised PCa diagnosed in KT patients undergoing curative treatments, including surgery, external beam radiotherapy (EBR) and brachytherapy. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: In total, 41 studies included 319 patients with localised PCa after KT. Their mean age was 61.8 (range, 47-79) yr and mean time from KT to PCa was 122 (range, 2-336) mo. Mean prostate-specific antigen was 8.5 (range, 0.3-82), most frequent biopsy Gleason score was 3+3 (50.5%), 62.1% were cT1-cT2, and 56.1% belonged to low-intermediate D'Amico-risk groups. Surgery was performed in 82.1%. After mean follow-up of 33 (range, 1-240) mo, cancer-specific survival at 5 yr was 97.5%, 87.5%, and 94.4% after surgery, EBR, and brachytherapy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Radical prostatectomy is the preferred treatment of localised PCa after KT. Overall oncological outcomes do not seem to be worse than general population when performed in referral centres. Other curative treatments such as EBR or brachytherapy were less frequently used; however, brachytherapy showed promising results in a small number of patients. Further better-quality studies should help to clarify the optimal method of managing localised PCa after KT. PATIENT SUMMARY: Localised PCa after KT seems to have similar oncological outcomes after curative treatments than in general population, with surgery being the most common option for treatment.