RESUMEN
Objective: Current urologic renal trauma guidelines favor conservative management. In 2012, we implemented an institution-wide renal trauma protocol to standardize management. This protocol details initiation of DVT (deep vein thrombosis) prophylaxis, cessation of bed rest, and frequency of laboratory studies. We hypothesized that low-grade injuries (grade I-III) could be managed without urologic consultation and that our chemical DVT prophylaxis regimen would not pose an increased risk of hemorrhage requiring transfusion. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of a prospectively maintained database containing all renal trauma at our institution from 2009 to 2019. We segregated injuries based on grade, presence of multi-organ trauma, and evaluated the presence and types of intervention, initiation of chemical DVT prophylaxis, and post-DVT prophylaxis hemorrhage requiring transfusion. Results: We identified 295 cases of renal trauma, of which 62 were isolated injuries. Forty-three of the isolated renal injuries were transferred from outside facilities, 70% of which were classified as low-grade injuries. There were 220 low-grade lacerations and 75 high-grade lacerations. No grade I or II lacerations required any interventions. Two (2.5%) grade III lacerations required IR embolization. Twenty-five (41%) grade IV lacerations required intervention, of which five were nephrectomy. Seven (54%) grade V lacerations required intervention, of which 5 were nephrectomies. Upon review of our protocol with early ambulation and DVT prophylaxis, there were no cases of isolated renal injury where initiation of either treatment resulted in delayed hemorrhage requiring transfusion or surgical intervention. Conclusion: Only 2/220 low-grade renal lacerations required intervention. Our data suggest that grade I and II renal lacerations can be managed safely without urologic consultation. Consultation is warranted for grade III injuries given the possibility of initial understaging. Furthermore, we believe our renal laceration protocol in our admittedly small, isolated sample has shown our DVT prophylaxis initiation to not pose increased risk.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We sought to determine if participating in a surgical training session using perfused fresh human cadavers (PFHC) had a positive effect on urology residents' confidence in performing open and endoscopic procedures. METHODS: Urology residents at our institution participated in a surgical training session in the West Virginia University Fresh Tissue Training Program, which utilized fresh cadavers with vascular perfusion. The session consisted of performing different urologic procedures (open and endoscopic) on the perfused fresh human cadavers (PFHC). Residents were given a survey to rate their confidence in different urologic procedures before, after, and 6 months after the session. Each procedure on the survey had 3-6 questions associated with it, with scores ranging from 0 (no confidence) to 4 (great confidence). Scores for each procedure before and after the session were compared. RESULTS: Six residents participated in the session. There was an increase in the score for every procedure performed after the session. Scores at 6 month follow up remained higher than the pre-session scores. CONCLUSION: PFHCs offer an excellent opportunity to teach a wide variety of urologic procedures to residents. Incorporation of PFHCs may be very useful in urologic training, and further studies on its use are warranted.