The dramatic COVID 19 outbreak in Italy is responsible of a huge drop of urological surgical activity: a multicenter observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the trend in surgical volume in urology in Italy during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, as a result of the abrupt reorganisation of the Italian national health system to augment care provision to symptomatic patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A total of 33 urological units with physicians affiliated to the AGILE consortium (Italian Group for Advanced Laparo-Endoscopic Surgery; www.agilegroup.it) were surveyed. Urologists were asked to report the amount of surgical elective procedures week-by-week, from the beginning of the emergency to the following month. RESULTS: The 33 hospitals involved in the study account overall for 22 945 beds and are distributed in 13/20 Italian regions. Before the outbreak, the involved urology units performed overall 1213 procedures/week, half of which were oncological. A month later, the number of surgeries had declined by 78%. Lombardy, the first region with positive COVID-19 cases, experienced a 94% reduction. The decrease in oncological and non-oncological surgical activity was 35.9% and 89%, respectively. The trend of the decline showed a delay of roughly 2 weeks for the other regions. CONCLUSION: Italy, a country with a high fatality rate from COVID-19, experienced a sudden decline in surgical activity. This decline was inversely related to the increase in COVID-19 care, with potential harm particularly in the oncological field. The Italian experience may be helpful for future surgical pre-planning in other countries not so drastically affected by the disease to date.

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.

Minimally invasive simple prostatectomy: Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopy. A comparative study.

PURPOSE: Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) is a novel surgical procedure for the management of obstructive symptoms caused by enlarged prostate glands. Before the introduction of minimally invasive techniques, the standard approach was the open simple prostatectomy (OSP). The aim of our study was to compare intraoperative and perioperative outcomes of robotic (RASP) and laparoscopic (LSP) simple prostatectomy. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from patients who underwent minimally invasive simple prostatectomy at the Urological Department of Portogruaro Hospital, Portogruaro, and at the Urological Department of "San Bassiano" Hospital, in Bassano del Grappa, from March 2015 to December 2020. Data collected from medical records included age, body mass index, prostate volume, operative time, preoperative International Prostatic Symptoms Score (IPSS), postoperative IPSS, time with drainage, blood transfusion, intraoperative complications, perioperative complications and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Robotic-assisted (n = 25) and laparoscopic simple prostatectomy (n = 25) were performed with a transvesical approach. No significant differences were observed regarding baseline characteristics, body mass index, prostate volume and IPSS. Operative time was lower in the laparoscopic group (122 min vs 139 min) (p = 0.024), while hospital stay was lower in the robotic group (4 days vs 6 days) (p = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy is a safe technique with results comparable to laparoscopic simple prostatectomy, encompassing the advantage of a shorter hospitalization. Considering the costs and the limited availability of robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy, laparoscopic simple prostatectomy is a valid and safe alternative for experienced surgeons.

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.

Perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing urological elective surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national overview across 28 Italian institutions.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to assess the safety of elective urological surgery performed during the pandemic by estimating the prevalence of COVID-19-like symptoms in the postoperative period and its correlation with perioperative and clinical factors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this multicenter, observational study we recorded clinical, surgical and postoperative data of consecutive patients undergoing elective urological surgery in 28 different institutions across Italy during initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic (between February 24 and March 30, 2020, inclusive). RESULTS: A total of 1943 patients were enrolled. In 12%, 7.1%, 21.3%, 56.7% and 2.6% of cases an open, laparoscopic, robotic, endoscopic or percutaneous surgical approach was performed, respectively. Overall, 166 (8.5%) postoperative complications were registered, 77 (3.9%) surgical and 89 (4.6%) medical. Twenty-eight (1.4%) patients were readmitted to hospital after discharge and 13 (0.7%) died. In the 30 days following discharge, fever and respiratory symptoms were recorded in 101 (5.2%) and 60 (3.1%) patients. At multivariable analysis, not performing nasopharyngeal swab at hospital admission (HR 2.3; CI 95% 1.01-5.19; p = 0.04) was independently associated with risk of developing postoperative medical complications. Number of patients in the facility was confirmed as an independent predictor of experiencing postoperative respiratory symptoms (p = 0.047, HR:1.12; CI95% 1.00-1.05), while COVID-19-free type of hospitalization facility was a strong independent protective factor (p = 0.02, HR:0.23, CI95% 0.07-0.79). CONCLUSIONS: Performing elective surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic does not seem to affect perioperative outcomes as long as proper preventive measures are adopted, including nasopharyngeal swab before hospital admission and hospitalization in dedicated COVID-19-free facilities.

Is contrast enhancement needed for diagnostic prostate MRI?

Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2) provides clinical guidelines for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) [T2-weighted imaging (T2WI), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI)] of prostate. However, DCE-MRI seems to show a limited contribution in prostate cancer (PCa) detection and management. In our experience, DCE-MRI, did not show significant change in diagnostic performance in addition to DWI and T2WI [biparametric MRI (bpMRI)] which represent the predominant sequences to detect suspected lesions in peripheral and transitional zone (TZ). In this article we reviewed the role of DCE-MRI also indicating the potential contribute of bpMRI approach (T2WI and DWI) and lesion volume evaluation in the diagnosis and management of suspected PCa.

Diet and chronic constipation. Benefits of oral supplementation with symbiotic zir fos (Bifidobacterium longum W11 + FOS Actilight).

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Constipation is one of the most common disorders in Western countries and it is known that dietary factors such as a low fiber diet and low caloric intake are associated with this condition. Weight loss can disrupt the intestinal ecosystem resulting in intestinal dysbiosis that worsens constipation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of treatment with symbiotic zir fos (Bifidobacterium longum W11 + FOS Actilight) on chronic constipation in patients undergoing a weight loss diet. METHODS: Our evaluation included the recording of age, gender, weight, height, BMI, physical activity, constipation, diet, therapy compliance and laxative supplies. A hypocaloric diet (1,200/1,400 cal.) was prescribed to all patients, and they were submitted to a physical activity program and received 1 bag of symbiotic zir fos per day for the entire duration of the study. Patients' follow-up was available for up to 60 days. RESULTS: Two hundred and ninety seven patients (79.4% women and 18.2% men, mean age 32.2) were included in the study. The mean baseline BMI was 33.4 +/- 5.6 (range 22.8-56.3 Kg). The improvement of constipation turned out to be associated to age (p < 0.01). Patients with a mean age of 35 +/- 12 showed an improvement of constipation. BMI values were not significantly different among the groups of patients with improved, worsened or unchanged constipation. No significative difference was observed among groups due to physical activity. At the follow-up, after 20 days from the beginning of the study, patients that assumed at least 17/20 of the zir fos bags showed a greater improvement of constipation (p < 0.01) than the remaining patients who assumed less than 17/20 of the zir fos bags or that didn't assumed any at all. Patients that assumed laxatives (at least once a week) showedn to be more frequently associated with a worsening of constipation (p < 0.001). Diet compliance does not seem to influence the course of constipation. CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrate the utility of symbiotics in improving constipation during hypocaloric diet in the treatment of obesity.