Urological Cancers and Kidney Transplantation: a Literature Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this review is to provide an overview of epidemiology, risk factors, and treatment of urological malignancies in renal transplant recipients (RTR). RECENT FINDINGS: Although optimal immunosuppressive therapy and cancer management in these patients remain controversial, adherence to general guidelines is recommended. Kidney transplantation is recognized as the standard of care for the treatment of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) as it offers prolonged survival and better quality of life. In the last decades, survival of RTRs has increased as a result of improved immunosuppressive therapy; nonetheless, the risk of developing cancer is higher among RTRs compared to the general population. Urological malignancies are the second most common after hematological cancer and often have more aggressive behavior and poor prognosis.

Impact of COVID-19 on medical education: introducing homo digitalis.

PURPOSE: To determine how members of the Société Internationale d'Urologie (SIU) are continuing their education in the time of COVID-19. METHODS: A survey was disseminated amongst SIU members worldwide by email. Results were analyzed to examine the influence of age, practice region and settings on continuing medical education (CME) of the respondents. RESULTS: In total, 2494 respondents completed the survey. Internet searching was the most common method of CME (76%; all ps < 0.001), followed by searching journals and textbook including the online versions (62%; all ps < 0.001). Overall, 6% of the respondents reported no time/interest for CME during the pandemic. Although most urologists report using only one platform for their CME (26.6%), the majority reported using ≥ 2 platforms, with approximately 10% of the respondents using up to 5 different platforms. Urologists < 40 years old were more likely to use online literature (69%), podcasts/AV media (38%), online CME courses/webinars (40%), and social media (39%). There were regional variations in the CME modality used but no significant difference in the number of methods by region. There was no significant difference in responses between urologists in academic/public hospitals or private practice. CONCLUSION: During COVID-19, urologists have used web-based learning for their CME. Internet learning and literature were the top frequently cited learning methods. Younger urologists are more likely to use all forms of digital learning methods, while older urologists prefer fewer methods.

American Confederation of Urology (CAU) experience in minimally invasive partial nephrectomy.

PURPOSE: To describe the perioperative and oncology outcomes in a series of laparoscopic or robotic partial nephrectomies (PN) for renal tumors treated in diverse institutions of Hispanic America from the beginning of their minimally invasive (MI) PN experience through December 2014. METHODS: Seventeen institutions participated in the CAU generated a MI PN database. We estimated proportions, medians, 95 % confidence intervals, Kaplan-Meier curves, multivariate logistic and Cox regression analyses. Clavien-Dindo classification was used. RESULTS: We evaluated 1501 laparoscopic (98 %) or robotic (2 %) PNs. Median age: 58 years. Median surgical time, warm ischemia and intraoperative bleeding were 150, 20 min and 200 cc. 81 % of the lesions were malignant, with clear cell histology being 65 % of the total. Median maximum tumor diameter is 2.7 cm, positive margin is 8.2 %, and median hospitalization is 3 days. One or more postoperative complication was recorded in 19.8 % of the patients: Clavien 1: 5.6 %; Clavien 2: 8.4 %; Clavien 3A: 1.5 %; Clavien 3B: 3.2 %; Clavien 4A: 1 %; Clavien 4B: 0.1 %; Clavien 5: 0 %. Bleeding was the main cause of a reoperation (5.5 %), conversion to radical nephrectomy (3 %) or open partial nephrectomy (6 %). Transfusion rate is 10 %. In multivariate analysis, RENAL nephrometry score was the only variable associated with complications (OR 1.1; 95 % CI 1.02-1.2; p = 0.02). Nineteen patients presented disease progression or died of disease in a median follow-up of 1.37 years. The 5-year progression or kidney cancer mortality-free rate was 94 % (95 % CI 90, 97). Positive margins (HR 4.98; 95 % CI 1.3-19; p = 0.02) and females (HR 5.6; 95 % CI 1.7-19; p = 0.005) were associated with disease progression or kidney cancer mortality after adjusting for maximum tumor diameter. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic PN in these centers of Hispanic America seem to have acceptable perioperative complications and short-term oncologic outcomes.