The Intraoperative Complications Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standards (ICARUS) Global Surgical Collaboration Project: Development of Criteria for Reporting Adverse Events During Surgical Procedures and Evaluating Their Impact on the Postoperative Course.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) are surgical and anesthesiologic complications. Despite the availability of grading criteria, iAEs are infrequently reported in the surgical literature and in cases for which iAEs are reported, these events are described with significant heterogeneity. OBJECTIVE: To develop Intraoperative Complications Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standards (ICARUS) Global Surgical Collaboration criteria to standardize the assessment, reporting, and grading of iAEs. The ultimate aim is to improve our understanding of the nature and frequency of iAEs and our ability to counsel patients regarding surgical procedures. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The present study involved the following steps: (1) collecting criteria for assessing, reporting, and grading of iAEs via a comprehensive umbrella review; (2) collecting additional criteria via a survey of a panel of experienced surgeons (first round of a modified Delphi survey); (3) creating a comprehensive list of reporting criteria; (4) combining criteria acquired in the first two steps; and (5) establishing a consensus on clinical and quality assessment utility as determined in the second round of the Delphi survey. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Panel inter-rater agreement and consistency were assessed as the overall percentage agreement and Cronbach's α. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The umbrella review led to nine common criteria for assessing, grading, and reporting iAEs, and review of iAE grading systems led to two additional criteria. In the first Delphi round, 35 surgeons responded and two criteria were added. In the second Delphi round, 13 common criteria met the threshold for final guideline inclusion. All 13 criteria achieved the consensus minimum of 70%, with agreement on the usefulness of the criteria for clinical and quality improvement ranging from 74% to 100%. The mean inter-rater agreement was 89.0% for clinical improvement and 88.6% for quality improvement. CONCLUSIONS: The ICARUS Global Collaboration criteria might aid in identifying important criteria when reporting iAEs, which will support all those involved in patient care and scientific publishing. PATIENT SUMMARY: We consulted a panel of experienced surgeons to develop a set of guidelines for academic surgeons to follow when publishing surgical studies. The surgeon panel proposed a list of 13 criteria that may improve global understanding of complications during specific procedures and thus improve the ability to counsel patients on surgical risk.

Diagnostic Performance of Ex Vivo Fluorescence Confocal Microscopy in the Assessment of Diagnostic Biopsies of the Prostate.

BACKGROUND: Fluorescence confocal microscopy (FCM) is a novel micro-imaging technique providing optical sections of examined tissue. The method has been well established for the diagnosis of tumors in dermatological specimens. METHODS: We compare intraoperative diagnoses of the real-time application of FCM in pre-therapeutic prostate biopsies (35 patients, total number of biopsy specimens: n = 438) with the findings of conventional histology. RESULTS: Prostate carcinoma was reliably diagnosed in all patients. Depending on scan quality and experience of the examiner, smaller lesions of well differentiated carcinoma (ISUP1) could not be consistently differentiated from reactive changes. Furthermore, in some cases there was difficulty to distinguish ISUP grade 2 from ISUP grade 1 tumors. ISUP grades 3-5 were reliably detected in FCM. CONCLUSIONS: Despite some limitations, FCM seems to be an effective tool for the timely assessment of prostate biopsies enabling reliable diagnosis of prostate cancer in patients requiring therapy.

Bioethical implications of robotic surgery in urology: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Robotic technologies are being increasingly implemented in healthcare, including urology, and holding promises for improving medicine worldwide. However, these new approaches raise ethical concerns for professionals, patients, researchers and institutions that need to be addressed. The aim of this review was to investigate the existing literature related to bioethical issues associated with robotic surgery in urology, in order to identify current challenges and make preliminary suggestions to ensure an ethical implementation of these technologies. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We performed a review of the pertaining literature through a systematic search of two databases (PubMed and Web of Science) in August 2020. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Our search yielded 76 articles for full-text evaluation and 48 articles were included in the narrative review. Several bioethical issues were identified and can be categorized into five main subjects: 1) robotic surgery accessibility (robotic surgery is expensive, and in some health systems may lead to inequality in healthcare access. In more affluent countries the national distribution of several robotic platforms may influence the centralization of robotic surgery, therefore potentially affecting oncological and functional outcomes in low-volume centers); 2) safety (there is a considerable gap between surgical skills and patients' perception of competence, leading to ethical consequences on modern healthcare. Published incidence of adverse events during robotic surgery in large series is between 2% and 15%, which does not significantly differ amongst open or laparoscopic approaches); 3) gender gap (no data about gap differences in accessibility to robotic platforms were retrieved from our search); 4) costs (robotic platforms are expensive but a key reason why hospitals are willing to absorb the high upfront costs is patient demand. It is possible to achieve cost-equivalence between open and robotic prostatectomy if the volume of centers is higher than 10 cases per week); and 5) learning curve (a validated, structured curriculum and accreditation has been created for robotic surgery. This allows acquisition and development of basic and complex robotic skills focusing on patient safety and short learning curve). CONCLUSIONS: Tech-medicine is rapidly moving forward. Robotic approach to urology seems to be accessible in more affluent countries, safe, economically sustainable, and easy to learn with an appropriate learning curve for both sexes. It is mandatory to keep maintaining a critical rational approach with constant control of the available evidence regarding efficacy, efficiency and safety.

COVID-19 model-based practice changes in managing a large prostate cancer practice: following the trends during a month-long ordeal.

Coronavirus (COVID-19) has been a life-changing experience for both individuals and institutions. We describe changes in our practice based on real-time assessment of various national and international trends of COVID-19 and its effectiveness in the management of our resources. Initial risk assessment and peak resource requirement using the COVID-19 Hospital Impact Model for Epidemics (CHIME) and McKinsey models. Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis of our practice's approach during the pandemic. Based on CHIME the community followed 60% social distancing, the number of expected new patients hospitalized at maximum surge would be 401, with 100 patients requiring ventilator support. In contrast, when the community followed 15% social distancing, the maximum surge of hospitalized new patients would be 1823 and 455 patients would require a ventilator. on April 15, the expected May requirement of ICU beds at peak would be 68, with 61 patients needing ventilators. The estimated surge numbers improved throughout April, and on April 22 the expected ICU bed peak in May would be 11.7, and those requiring ventilator would be 10.5. Simultaneously, within a month, our surgical waitlist grew from 585 to over 723 patients. Our SWOT analysis revealed our internal strengths and inherent weakness, relevant to the pandemic. A graded and a guarded response to this type of situation is crucial in managing patients in a large practice.

Management of patients who opt for radical prostatectomy during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: an international accelerated consensus statement.

OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic caused delays in definitive treatment of patients with prostate cancer. Beyond the immediate delay a backlog for future patients is expected. The objective of this work is to develop guidance on criteria for prioritisation of surgery and reconfiguring management pathways for patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer who opt for surgical treatment. A second aim was to identify the infection prevention and control (IPC) measures to achieve a low likelihood of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hazard if radical prostatectomy (RP) was to be carried out during the outbreak and whilst the disease is endemic. METHODS: We conducted an accelerated consensus process and systematic review of the evidence on COVID-19 and reviewed international guidance on prostate cancer. These were presented to an international prostate cancer expert panel (n = 34) through an online meeting. The consensus process underwent three rounds of survey in total. Additions to the second- and third-round surveys were formulated based on the answers and comments from the previous rounds. The Consensus opinion was defined as ≥80% agreement and this was used to reconfigure the prostate cancer pathways. RESULTS: Evidence on the delayed management of patients with prostate cancer is scarce. There was 100% agreement that prostate cancer pathways should be reconfigured and measures developed to prevent nosocomial COVID-19 for patients treated surgically. Consensus was reached on prioritisation criteria of patients for surgery and management pathways for those who have delayed treatment. IPC measures to achieve a low likelihood of nosocomial COVID-19 were coined as 'COVID-19 cold' sites. CONCLUSION: Reconfiguring management pathways for patients with prostate cancer is recommended if significant delay (>3-6 months) in surgical management is unavoidable. The mapped pathways provide guidance for such patients. The IPC processes proposed provide a framework for providing RP within an environment with low COVID-19 risk during the outbreak or when the disease remains endemic. The broader concepts could be adapted to other indications beyond prostate cancer surgery.

To defer or not to defer? A German longitudinal multicentric assessment of clinical practice in urology during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: After the outbreak of COVID-19 unprecedented changes in the healthcare systems worldwide were necessary resulting in a reduction of urological capacities with postponements of consultations and surgeries. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An email was sent to 66 urological hospitals with focus on robotic surgery (RS) including a link to a questionnaire (e.g. bed/staff capacity, surgical caseload, protection measures during RS) that covered three time points: a representative baseline week prior to COVID-19, the week of March 16th-22nd and April 20th-26th 2020. The results were evaluated using descriptive analyses. RESULTS: 27 out of 66 questionnaires were analyzed (response rate: 41%). We found a decrease of 11% in hospital beds and 25% in OR capacity with equal reductions for endourological, open and robotic procedures. Primary surgical treatment of urolithiasis and benign prostate syndrome (BPS) but also of testicular and penile cancer dropped by at least 50% while the decrease of surgeries for prostate, renal and urothelial cancer (TUR-B and cystectomies) ranged from 15 to 37%. The use of personal protection equipment (PPE), screening of staff and patients and protection during RS was unevenly distributed in the different centers-however, the number of COVID-19 patients and urologists did not reach double digits. CONCLUSION: The German urological landscape has changed since the outbreak of COVID-19 with a significant shift of high priority surgeries but also continuation of elective surgical treatments. While screening and staff protection is employed heterogeneously, the number of infected German urologists stays low.

Urology in the Time of Coronavirus: Reduced Access to Urgent and Emergent Urological Care during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outbreak in Italy.

PURPOSE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has put a substantial burden on the Italian healthcare system, resulting in the restructuring of hospitals to care for COVID-19 patients. However, this has likely impacted access to care for patients experiencing other conditions. We aimed to quantify the impact of COVID-19 on access to care for patients with urgent/emergent urological conditions throughout Italy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to 33 urological units in the AGILE consortium, asking clinicians to report on the number of urgent/emergent urological patients seen and/or undergoing surgery over a 3-week period during the peak of the COVID-19 outbreak and a reference week prior to the outbreak. ANOVA and linear regression models were used to quantify these changes. RESULTS: Data from 27 urological centres in Italy showed a decrease from 956 patients/week seen just prior to the outbreak to 291 patients/week seen by the end of the study period. There was a difference in the number of patients with urgent/emergent urological disease seen within/during the different weeks (all p values < 0.05). A significant decrease in the number of patients presenting with haematuria, urinary retention, urinary tract infection, scrotal pain, renal colic, or trauma and urgent/emergent cases that required surgery was reported (all p values < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In Italy, during the COVID-19 outbreak there has been a decrease in patients seeking help for urgent/emergent urological conditions. Restructuring of hospitals and clinics is mandatory to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic; however, the healthcare system should continue to provide adequate levels of care also to patients with other conditions.

"Real-time" Assessment of Surgical Margins During Radical Prostatectomy: State-of-the-Art.

Histopathologic examination of the pathologic specimens using hematoxylin & eosin stains represents the backbone of the modern pathology. It is time-consuming; thus, "real-time" assessment of prostatic and periprostatic tissue has gained special interest in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer. The current study focuses on the review of the different available techniques for "real-time" evaluation of surgical margins during radical prostatectomy (RP). We performed a comprehensive search of the Medline database to identify all the articles discussing "real-time" or intraoperative assessment of surgical margins during RP. Several filters were applied to the search to include only English articles performed on human subjects and published between January 2000 and March 2019. The search revealed several options for pathologic assessment of surgical margins including intraoperative frozen sections, confocal laser endomicroscopy, optical spectroscopy, photodynamic diagnosis, optical coherence tomography, multiphoton microscopy, structured illumination microscopy, 3D augmented reality, and ex vivo fluorescence confocal microscope. Frozen section represents the gold standard technique for real-time pathologic examinations of surgical margins during RP; however, several other options showed promising results in the initial clinical trials, and considering the rapid development in the field of molecular and cellular imaging, some of these options may serve as an alternative to frozen section.