Decision regret after prostate biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis: a Korean multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Many people struggle with the choice in a series of processes, from prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis to treatment. We investigated the degree of regret after the prostate biopsy (PBx) and relevant factors in patients recommended for biopsy for suspected PCa. METHODS: From 06/2020 to 05/2022, 198 people who performed PBx at three institutions were enrolled and analyzed through a questionnaire before and after biopsy. Before the biopsy, a questionnaire was conducted to evaluate the sociodemographic information, anxiety scale, and health literacy, and after PBx, another questionnaire was conducted to evaluate the decision regret scale. For patients diagnosed as PCa after biopsy, a questionnaire was conducted when additional tests were performed at PCa staging work-up. RESULTS: 190 patients answered the questionnaire before and after PBx. The mean age was 66.2 ± 7.8 years. Overall, 5.5% of men regretted biopsy, but there was no significant difference between groups according to the PCa presence. Multivariate analysis, to identify predictors for regret, revealed that the case when physicians did not properly explain what the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test was like and what PSA elevation means (OR 20.57, [95% CI 2.45-172.70], p = 0.005), low media literacy (OR 10.01, [95% CI 1.09-92.29], p = 0.042), and when nobody to rely on (OR 8.49, [95% CI 1.66-43.34], p = 0.010) were significantly related. CONCLUSIONS: Overall regret related to PBx was low. Decision regret was more significantly related to media literacy rather than to educational level. For patients with relatively low media literacy and fewer people to rely on in case of serious diseases, more careful attention and counseling on PBx, including a well-informed explanation on PSA test, is helpful.

Pneumovesical vesicovaginal fistula repair: Lessons learned from an initial series of 25 patients.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to share the experiences and outcomes of laparoscopic pneumovesical repair for vesicovaginal fistulas (VVF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of medical records from a single institution over 10 years was conducted. The focus was on patients who underwent VVF repair using a pneumovesical approach with three 5 mm laparoscopic ports. The study evaluated perioperative parameters, postoperative outcomes, and complication rates to assess the efficacy and safety of this surgical method. Cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis was used to determine the learning curve based on operative time. RESULTS: Of the 26 patients with VVF, 23 (88.5%) had successful fistula closure after the first surgery. One patient required open surgery conversion due to challenges in maintaining pneumovesicum, and two experienced recurrences, although successful repairs were achieved in subsequent surgeries. The average patient age was 47.4 years, with a mean operative time of 99.9 min. The postoperative hospital stay averaged 9.1 days, and catheterization lasted about 11 days. The CUSUM chart indicated a learning curve, with fluctuations until the 19th case, followed by a consistent upward pattern. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic pneumovesical VVF repair is an effective and safe technique, especially suitable for fistulas near the ureteral orifice or deep in the vaginal cavity. The method demonstrates favorable outcomes with minimal complications and allows for easy reoperation if necessary.