MAGnetic REtriaval Device for Minimally Invasive Ureter Stent Removal.

Purpose: To assess the effectiveness and pain intensity associated with magnetic ureteral stent removal using a retriever, without the aid of ultrasound guidance. Methods: We prospectively enrolled 100 patients who underwent retrograde rigid and flexible ureterorenoscopy with or without laser lithotripsy for ureteronephrolithiasis treatment from September 2021 to June 2023. These patients were assigned in two groups. Group 1 underwent the traditional ureteral stent insertion, while Group 2 underwent magnetic ureteral stent insertion. Both insertion and removal times were documented. The indwelling time for ureteral stents was 14 days. One group underwent stent removal via flexible cystoscopy using grasping forceps and the other group using just a magnetic retriever, without the aid of ultrasound guidance. The numeric pain rating scale, recommendation rate, and a standardized self-answered ureter stent symptoms questionnaire (USSQ) were obtained directly after stent removal. Results: Both groups presented comparable characteristics in factors such as age, body mass index, history of stone treatments, procedure type, and complication rates during and post-surgery. Time taken for ureteral stent insertion did not differ significantly between the groups (131.2 seconds for Group 1 vs 159.1 seconds for Group 2). However, the stent removal time (152.1 seconds for Group 1 vs 35.4 seconds for Group 2) and pain intensity (6 for Group 1 vs 2 for Group 2) were significantly lower for Group 2. Furthermore, five out of the six sections of the USSQ showed significantly better results for Group 2. Conclusions: The use of magnetic ureteral stents, as a safe and efficient alternative to conventional ureteral stents, not only eliminates the need for cystoscopy but also conserves resources and reduces patient discomfort.

The Impact of Prostate Volume in Open Radical Prostatectomy: A Single Centre Experience.

BACKGROUND: Even the most experienced surgeons experience technical difficulties and challenges when operating on very large prostates, regardless of surgical technique. Our goal was to determine whether preoperative prostate volume has an impact on functional and oncological outcomes after open radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed the records of 909 patients who underwent open radical prostatectomy by a single surgeon at our institution. Variables were compared across quartile distributions of prostate volume as defined by preoperative transrectal ultrasound examination, including group A with prostate volume < 30ccm 3, group B with prostate volume ≥ 30ccm 3 and < 50ccm 3, group C with prostate volume ≥ 50ccm 3 and < 70ccm 3 and group D with prostate volume ≥ 70ccm3. Factors assessed in this analysis were patient age, preoperative prostate specific antigen (p-PSA), Gleason score, pathological stage, margin status, operative time, cystography leakage, early continence, biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free, and overall-survival (OS). The complication rates were classified using Clavien Dindo classification. RESULTS: There were no statistically relevant differences between the groups considering preoperative factors such as age, p-PSA, Gleason score, and tumor stadium. Patients with a very large prostate had slightly higher percentage of anastomosis leakage, severe Clavien Dindo complication rates (≥ 3), longer operation time and severe early incontinence (IV°) rates, simultaneously having lower positive margin rates. Nevertheless, the early continence rates, BCR-free and OS were similar regardless of the prostate size. CONCLUSIONS: open radical prostatectomy for patients with very large prostate is a viable therapy option with slightly higher urinary leakage-, early incontinence- and complication-rates that takes slightly more operation time. However, the functional and oncological outcomes are similar when compared to smaller prostates.

Perineural invasion as predictor of biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer following open radical prostatectomy: a single-center experience.

PURPOSE: To explore the association between perineural invasion (PNI) and biochemical recurrence (BCR) in patients undergoing open radical prostatectomy (ORP). METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted, in which we analyzed patients who underwent ORP at our institution between 2003 and 2020. The biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival and overall survival (OS) rates were defined using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank analysis. Multivariable Cox-regression models were used to test the effect of other different factors such as preoperative PSA, Gleason score and T stage on biochemical recurrence. The Clavien-Dindo classification was used to report the complication rates. RESULTS: In total, 1040 patients were included. PNI was found in 458 (44.1%) and BCR occurred in 212 patients (20.4%) at a median follow-up of 91.2 months. After undergoing the procedure, 216 patients received adjuvant external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). Despite receiving adjuvant treatment, the BCR-free survival was still significantly shorter for PNI-positive patients (mean 32.2 vs. 62.3 months, p < 0.001). The 5- and 10-year BCR-free survival rates for patients without PNI were 90% and 81%, respectively. For the same period of time, BCR-free survival rates for patients with PNI were 75 and 63%, respectively. Therefore, PNI was a strong predictor of BCR (p < 0.001). These results remained even after controlling for established predictors of biochemical recurrence. Limitations include retrospective and single-center study design. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, despite its limitations, our study emphasizes the prognostic importance of PNI in prostate cancer patients. The results demonstrate that the presence of PNI is associated with a high risk of BCR.

Estimation of the Most Influential Factors for Survival Probability Prediction of Prostate Cancer Patients.

The objective of the study was to address some important questions related to prostate cancer treatments and survivorship. One of possibility to improve the survival probability of prostate cancer patients is to improve predictive strategies. Therefore in this article was created short-term multistep ahead predictive model for survival probability prediction of prostate cancer patients. Neuro-fuzzy model was used to select the most important inputs for the predictive model. As the inputs, current and time lagged variables were used. The results could be useful for simplification of predictive models to avoid multiple inputs.