Does Previous Open Stone Surgery Affect the Outcome of Shock Wave Lithotripsy Treatment in Children?

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficiency of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in children who previously underwent ipsilateral open renal stone surgery (ORSS). METHODS: A total of 315 renal units (RUs) with renal stones underwent SWL treatment in our department over a period of 18 years. A total of 274 RUs (87%) with no history of ORSS were categorized as group 1 and 41 RUs (13%) with a history of ORSS were categorized as group 2. The characteristics of the patients and renal stones, as well as the treatment modalities, were reviewed retrospectively, and the results were compared in terms of the rates of stone-free patients and complications. RESULTS: The stone-free rates were statistically lower in patients with an existing history of ORSS (p = 0.002), especially for stones located at the lower calyx (p = 0.006). However, there were no differences between groups in the rate of complications (p = 0.75). History of ipsilateral ORSS, age, and stone burden were independent risk factors that predicted a stone-free status in the regression analysis (p = 0.016, p = 0.045, and p = 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: The overall stone-free rate after SWL was found to be significantly lower in children with a history of ORSS than in those without, and this finding was significantly prominent for lower calyx stones. In spite of the possible difficulties in achieving surgical access due to anatomical changes in retrograde intrarenal surgery or mini-/micro-percutaneous nephrolithotomy, we believe that these techniques might be good alternatives for SWL in future cases.

Nation-wide analysis of the impact of Covid-19 pandemic on daily urology practice in Turkey.

OBJECTIVE: To present a nation-wide analysis of the workload of urology departments in Turkey week-by-week during Covid-19 pandemic. METHODOLOGY: The centres participating in the study were divided into three groups as tertiary referral centres, state hospitals and private practice hospitals. The number of outpatients, inpatients, daily interventions and urological surgeries were recorded prospectively between 9-March-2020 and 31-May-2020. All these variables were recorded for the same time interval of 2019 as well. The weekly change of the workload of urology during pandemic period was evaluated, also the workload of urology and the distributions of certain urological surgeries were compared between the pandemic period and the same time interval of the year 2019. RESULTS: A total of 51 centres participated in the study. The number of outpatients, inpatients, urological surgeries and daily interventions were found to be dramatically decreased by the 3rd week of pandemics in state hospitals and tertiary referral centres; however, the daily urological practice were similar in private practice hospitals throughout the pandemic period. When the workload of urology in pandemic period and the same time interval of the year 2019 were compared, a huge decrease was observed in all variables during pandemic period. However, temporary measures like ureteral stenting, nephrostomy placement and percutaneous cystostomy have been found to increase during Covid-19 pandemic compared with normal life. CONCLUSIONS: Covid-19 pandemic significantly affected the routine daily urological practice likewise other subspecialties and priority was given to emergent and non-deferrable surgeries by urologists in concordance with published clinical guidelines.