Laser enucleation of the prostate (LEP) vs. simple prostatectomy: an analysis of hospital charges and comparison of practice trends.

PURPOSE: Laser enucleation of the prostate (LEP) and simple prostatectomy (SP) are surgical treatment options for large gland Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. While multiple studies compare clinical outcomes of these procedures, there are limited data available comparing hospital charges in the United States. Here, we present current practice trends and a hospital charge analysis on a national level using an annual insurance claims data repository. METHODS: The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project National Inpatient Sample and Nationwide Ambulatory Surgery Sample databases for 2018 were queried. CPT and ICD-10PCS codes identified patients undergoing LEP or SP, who were then compared for practice setting, total hospital charges, and payor. Laser type for LEP and surgical approach for SP could not be differentiated. RESULTS: The median hospital charge of 5782 LEPs and 973 SPs is $26,689 and $51,250 (p < 0.001), respectively. LEP independently predicts a decreased hospital charge of $16,464 (p < 0.001) per case. Medicare is the primary payor for both procedures. More LEP procedures are completed in the outpatient setting (87.8%) vs. SPs (5.7%, p < 0.001). Median length of stay is longer for SP (LEP: 0, IQR: 0; SP: 3, IQR: 2-4; p < 0.001). In the Western region, LEP is least commonly performed (184, p < 0.001), most expensive ($43,960; p < 0.001), and has longer length of stay (2, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: LEP should be considered a cost-effective alternative to SP. Regions of the U.S. that perform more LEPs have shorter length of stay and lower hospital charges associated with the procedure.

A buccal mucosal graft subcoronal resurfacing technique to treat recurrent penile adhesions: the buccal belt.

OBJECTIVE: To outline our step-by-step surgical technique using a subcoronal buccal mucosal graft (BMG) resurfacing technique for the treatment of recurrent penile adhesions. METHODS: To perform the 'buccal belt' procedure a subcoronal circumferential segment of diseased skin was excised. An appropriately sized BMG was circumferentially secured subcoronally with a proximal and distal anastomosis to the edges of the wound. Quilting stitches were also placed to allow proper graft fixation. A petroleum jelly bolster was secured as a tie-over dressing. Patients were discharged with a Foley catheter and the bolster dressing in place. The bolster and Foley catheter were removed 7 days postoperatively. The patients were then seen for follow-up at 4- to 6-month intervals. A retrospective, international multi-institutional review was conducted to include all patients who underwent this procedure. Surgical complications, evidence of recurrence, and patient-reported outcome measures including visual analogue scale (VAS) and global response assessment (GRA) questionnaires were reviewed. RESULTS: Thirty-one men underwent the procedure across six institutions between March 2014 and September 2020. The mean (range) surgical time was 59 (25-95) min. At the mean (range) follow-up of 27 (4-79) months all patients reported resolution of presenting symptoms and no recurrence of adhesions. The mean VAS score was 8.9 and 9.0 for aesthetics and functional outcomes, respectively. On GRA, overall improvement was reported by all patients (61%, +3; 25%, +2; 14%, +1). CONCLUSION: There are limited options for the treatment of recurrent penile adhesions. A subcoronal BMG resurfacing is feasible, with no recurrence and overall high satisfaction seen in an initial patient cohort.

One or Two Stage Buccal Augmented Urethroplasty has a High Success Rate in Treating Post Phalloplasty Anastomotic Urethral Stricture.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the outcomes of single-stage and staged repairs in properly selected patients with phalloplasty anastomotic strictures. METHODS: A bi-institutional retrospective review was performed of all patients who underwent anastomotic stricture repairs between 7/2014-8/2020. Those who had prior augmented urethroplasties or poorly vascularized tissue underwent two-stage repairs (Group-2), all others underwent single-stage repair with a double-face (dorsal inlay and ventral onlay) buccal mucosal graft urethroplasty (Group-1). Postoperatively, urethral patency and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) were assessed. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients with anastomotic strictures were identified. Fourteen patients met inclusion criteria and had 1-year follow-up (9 in Group-1; 5 in Group-2). Nine patients (64%) had prior failed interventions (56% Group-1; 80% Group-2). At a mean follow-up of 33.9 (Group-1) and 35.2 months (Group-2) there were two stricture recurrences in Group-1 (22%) and none in Group-2. PROMs were completed by 12 patients. All patients reported the ability to void standing. Post-void dribbling was present in the majority of patients (7/7 Group-1; 2/4 in Group-2). Mean IPSS was 3.9 (0-14) for Group-1 and 1 (0-3) for Group-2. All reported at least a moderate improvement in their condition on GRA (Group-1 +3 71%, +2 29%; Group-2 +3 100%). CONCLUSION: Single-stage repairs are feasible for patients with anastomotic strictures who have well vascularized tissue and no prior single-stage buccal mucosa augmented urethroplasty failures. Staged repairs are feasible for patients with poor tissue quality. Proper patient selection is important for successful reconstruction.

Preoperative Modified Spermatic Cord Block Predicts Success in Candidates for Microscopic Spermatic Cord Denervation.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the utility of a modified spermatic cord block (MSCB) that targets known contributors to refractory chronic scrotal content pain (CSCP) at predicting postoperative pain relief following a microscopic spermatic cord denervation (MSCD). METHODS: A MSCB was performed in all patients with refractory CSCP. This was performed by injecting anesthetic circumferentially around the vas deferens and over the external ring. Patients with >50% pain reduction were offered MSCD. Baseline, post-block, and postoperative pain was assessed. Age, prior groin surgery, and post-block pain free period were recorded. A multivariate linear regression model was used to determine predictors of surgical success. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients underwent a MSCB. Forty-six (88%) had an adequate response and underwent MSCD. All patients saw improvement in pain postoperatively with an average reduction of 80% (4 < 50%; 7 50-69%; 35 ≥ 70%). On multivariate linear regression analysis, pain reduction following MSCD was an independent predictor of postoperative improvement (P < 0.001). No other factors, including post-block pain free period or prior surgery predicted success. CONCLUSIONS: The described MSCB can be utilized as an independent predictor of success following MSCD. Post-block pain free period was not associated with postoperative pain level. The MSCB may help identify candidates for MSCD that would be missed with the traditional block.