ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Iatrogenic ureteral strictures (US) after endoscopic treatment for urolithiasis represent a significant healthcare concern. However, high-quality evidence on the risk factors associated with US is currently lacking. We aimed to develop a consensus statement addressing the definition, risk factors, and follow-up management of iatrogenic US after endoscopic treatment for urolithiasis. METHODS: Utilizing a modified Delphi method, a steering committee developed survey statements based on a systematic literature review. Then, a two-round online survey was submitted to 25 experts, offering voting options to assess agreement levels. A consensus panel meeting was held for unresolved statements. The predetermined consensus threshold was set at 70%. RESULTS: The steering committee formulated 73 statements. In the initial survey, consensus was reached on 56 (77%) statements. Following in-depth discussions and refinement of 17 (23%) statements in a consensus meeting, the second survey achieved consensus on 63 (86%) statements. This process underscored agreement on pivotal factors influencing US in endoscopic urolithiasis treatments. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a comprehensive list of categorized risk factors for US following endoscopic urolithiasis treatments. The objectives include enhancing uniformity in research, minimizing redundancy in outcome assessments, and effectively addressing risk factors associated with US. These findings are crucial for designing future clinical trials and guiding endoscopic surgeons in mitigating the risk of US.
Subject(s)
Delphi Technique , Ureteral Obstruction , Ureteroscopy , Urolithiasis , Humans , Urolithiasis/surgery , Risk Factors , Ureteroscopy/adverse effects , Ureteral Obstruction/surgery , Ureteral Obstruction/etiology , Constriction, Pathologic , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Iatrogenic Disease , Internationality , ConsensusABSTRACT
In recent years, various aspects of prostate cancer (PC) management have undergone significant changes, including the implementation of therapeutic strategies such as the use of new hormonal agents like abiraterone, apalutamide, enzalutamide or darolutamide and the incorporation of next generation imaging techniques (NGI). However, the evidence regarding the role of NGI and the therapeutic decision-making based on their findings is not solid. Following the methodology of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC), a multidisciplinary expert consensus was developed to address controversial questions concerning the use of NGI and clinical management in four priority scenarios: localized PC, PC after radical prostatectomy, PC after radiotherapy with curative intent, and metastatic hormone-sensitive PC. This consensus represents the opinions of medical oncology, radiation oncology and urology physicians and provides useful recommendations for clinical practice.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the predictive capacity of the nephrolithometry scoring systems (GSS, STONE, CROES and S-ReSC) and stone surface regarding success and complications following percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). METHODS: We studied 392 patients who had undergone PCNL in our center. Only patients with a non-contrast CT (nâ¯=â¯240) were finally included for analysis. The predictive capacities for success and complications of the different scoring systems were evaluated using ROC curves and their area under the curve (AUC). RESULTS: Regarding success, the S-ReSC system had the highest predictive capacity with an AUC of 0.681 (95% CI 0.610-0.751), followed by the CROES with 0.667 (95% CI 0.595-0.738), the STONE with 0.654 (95% CI 0.579-0.728) and finally the GSS with 0.626 (95% CI 0.555-0.698). The stone surface as a single variable had an AUC of 0.641 (95% CI 0.565-0.718). As for complications, the S-ReSC had the highest AUC with 0.664 (95% CI 0.57-0.758), followed by STONE with 0.663 (95% CI 0.572-0.755), GSS with 0.626 (95% CI 0.555).-0.698) and CROES with 0.614 (95% CI 0.518-0.7). The stone surface alone had an AUC of 0.616 (95% CI 0.522-0.715). CONCLUSION: The nephrolithometry scales analyzed show a moderate predictive capacity for success and complications in patients undergoing PCNL in our center. Moreover, stone surface as an independent variable demonstrates moderate predictive capacity for both outcomes.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: We aimed to accurately determine ureteral stricture (US) rates following urolithiasis treatments and their related risk factors. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following the PRISMA guidelines using databases from inception to November 2023. Studies were deemed eligible for analysis if they included ≥ 18 years old patients with urinary lithiasis (Patients) who were subjected to endoscopic treatment (Intervention) with ureteroscopy (URS), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), or shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) (Comparator) to assess the incidence of US (Outcome) in prospective and retrospective studies (Study design). RESULTS: A total of 43 studies were included. The pooled US rate was 1.3% post-SWL and 2.1% post-PCNL. The pooled rate of US post-URS was 1.9% but raised to 2.7% considering the last five years' studies and 4.9% if the stone was impacted. Moreover, the pooled US rate differed if follow-ups were under or over six months. Patients with proximal ureteral stone, preoperative hydronephrosis, intraoperative ureteral perforation, and impacted stones showed higher US risk post-endoscopic intervention with odds ratio of 1.6 (P = 0.05), 2.6 (P = 0.009), 7.1 (P < 0.001), and 7.47 (P = 0.003), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The overall US rate ranges from 0.3 to 4.9%, with an increasing trend in the last few years. It is influenced by type of treatment, stone location and impaction, preoperative hydronephrosis and intraoperative perforation. Future standardized reporting and prospective and more extended follow-up studies might contribute to a better understanding of US risks related to calculi treatment.
Subject(s)
Lithotripsy , Postoperative Complications , Ureteroscopy , Urolithiasis , Humans , Ureteroscopy/adverse effects , Risk Factors , Urolithiasis/surgery , Urolithiasis/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Lithotripsy/adverse effects , Lithotripsy/methods , Constriction, Pathologic , Nephrolithotomy, Percutaneous/adverse effects , Nephrolithotomy, Percutaneous/methods , Ureteral Obstruction/etiology , Ureteral Obstruction/surgeryABSTRACT
Introducción Desde 1980, la litotricia extracorpórea por ondas de choque (SWL) ha sido empleada en el tratamiento de las litiasis urinarias, ofreciendo alternativas no invasivas a las técnicas quirúrgicas. Aunque limitada por tamaño y ubicación de las piedras, su efectividad se ve afectada por varios factores. A pesar de la evolución de técnicas quirúrgicas, la SWL podría mantener su relevancia con nuevos avances. Nuestro objetivo es revisar la bibliografía existente para recopilar los mayores avances hasta la fecha en el tratamiento extracorpóreo de la litiasis. Material y métodos Se ha realizado una revisión bibliográfica no sistemática, entre los años 2017 a 2023 para obtener 26 artículos sobre 3 tipos de innovación tecnológica en litotricia extracorpórea: Burst Wave Lithotripsy (BWL), Histotripsy y Microbubble Lithotripsy (ML). Resultados La BWL emplea ondas sinusoidales ultrasónicas de menor y mayor frecuencia que la SWL tradicional. Su mecanismo de acción genera una fragmentación de mayor calidad (finos fragmentos) en lugar de generar fuerzas tensionales como en la SWL tradicional que generan líneas de fractura que dan lugar a fragmentos de mayor tamaño. Resultados en cerdos y humanos han mostrado fragmentación efectiva con buen perfil de seguridad. Basada en la tecnología de ultrasonido focalizado de alta intensidad (HIFU), la histotricia fragmenta tejido empleando fenómenos de cavitación. Han mostrado buenos resultados in vitro, aunque la formación de microburbujas que se interponen entre la litiasis y las ondas de ultrasonido son un impedimento para el progreso de esta técnica. La ML combina microburbujas y ultrasonido para fragmentar litiasis con seguridad y eficacia. Resultados in vitro y en cerdos son prometedores. Puede optimizar tratamientos y reducir niveles energéticos. Conclusiones La innovación tecnológica no solo se está aplicando a técnicas endourológicas, sino también a la ESWL. ... (AU)
Introduction Since 1980, extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (SWL) has been employed in the treatment of urolithiasis, offering noninvasive alternatives to surgical techniques. In addition to being limited by the size and location of the stones, its efficacy is influenced by several factors. Despite the advancement of other surgical techniques, SWL could maintain its position with new improvements. Our objective is to review the existing literature on the latest advances in the extracorporeal treatment of lithiasis. Material and methods A non-systematic literature review was carried out from 2017 to 2023 to obtain 26 articles on three different emerging technologies in extracorporeal lithotripsy: Burst Wave Lithotripsy (BWL), Histotripsy, and Microbubble Lithotripsy (ML). Results The BWL uses sinusoidal bursts of US waves delivered at lower and higher frequencies than conventional SWL. Its mechanism of action generates a higher quality fragmentation (fine fragments) instead of generating tensile stresses for stone fracture resulting in larger fragments, as in traditional SWL. Studies in pigs and humans have shown effective fragmentation with a good safety profile. Based on High Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) technology, histotripsy fragments tissue through cavitation. Good in vitro results have been shown, but the formation of microbubbles between the stone and ultrasound waves hinders the progress of this technique. Microbubble Lithotripsy (ML) combines microbubbles and ultrasound for safe and effective stone fragmentation. In vitro and pig results are promising. This technique can help optimize treatments and reduce energy levels. Conclusions Technological innovation is not only being applied to endourological techniques, but also to ESWL. New techniques such as BWL, histotripsy and ML are promising, with good results in the research phase. (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Inventions/trends , Lithotripsy/instrumentation , High-Energy Shock Waves/therapeutic useABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Since 1980, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) has been employed in the treatment of urolithiasis, offering noninvasive alternatives to surgical techniques. In addition to being limited by the size and location of the stones, its efficacy is influenced by several factors. Despite the advancement of other surgical techniques, SWL could maintain its position with new improvements. Our objective is to review the existing literature on the latest advances in the extracorporeal treatment of lithiasis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A non-systematic literature review was carried out from 2017 to 2023 to obtain 26 articles on three different emerging technologies in extracorporeal lithotripsy: Burst Wave Lithotripsy (BWL), Histotripsy, and Microbubble Lithotripsy (ML). RESULTS: The BWL uses sinusoidal bursts of US waves delivered at lower and higher frequencies than conventional SWL. Its mechanism of action generates a higher quality fragmentation (fine fragments) instead of generating tensile stresses for stone fracture resulting in larger fragments, as in traditional SWL. Studies in pigs and humans have shown effective fragmentation with a good safety profile. Based on High Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) technology, histotripsy fragments tissue through cavitation. Good in vitro results have been shown, but the formation of microbubbles between the stone and ultrasound waves hinders the progress of this technique. Microbubble Lithotripsy (ML) combines microbubbles and ultrasound for safe and effective stone fragmentation. In vitro and pig results are promising. This technique can help optimize treatments and reduce energy levels. CONCLUSIONS: Technological innovation is not only being applied to endourological techniques, but also to ESWL. New techniques such as BWL, histotripsy and ML are promising, with good results in the research phase.
Subject(s)
Lithotripsy , Urolithiasis , Humans , Animals , Swine , Inventions , Urolithiasis/therapy , Lithotripsy/methods , UltrasonographySubject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Androstenes/therapeutic use , HormonesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Urinary lithiasis is a prevalent disease with a high socioeconomic impact, where endourological surgery has shown excellent results with minimal complications. For its part, outpatient surgery is an efficient, safe and quality care model. We present our experience in the outpatient endourological treatment of lithiasis and a review of the main series. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective analysis of 85 flexible or percutaneous procedures for the treatment of lithiasis, carried out in our center between January 2021 and April 2022. The main objective was to analyze the rate of unplanned admission and the success and incidence of complications as secondary objectives. The patients were selected following the inclusion criteria of the care process. RESULTS: The mean age was 56 ± 14 years. Urine culture was positive in 13.9% of the patients, 38% had a pre-surgical double-J catheter. Median stone surface was 55 mm 2 (961 ± 323 Hounsfield Units). 73 flexible and 12 percutaneous procedures were performed. 8 patients required immediate unplanned admission and another 2 during the first month. 94% were stone-free at the third month. No intraoperative complications were detected, although 16.5% of the patients presented some type of postoperative complication. CONCLUSION: In our experience, with a strict selection of patients and following a care process with multidisciplinary participation, endourological procedures are feasible and safe in the outpatient setting. Periodic monitoring of the results is essential for the sake of a constant improvement of the process.
Subject(s)
Kidney Calculi , Lithiasis , Humans , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Ureteroscopy/methods , Kidney Calculi/surgery , Kidney Calculi/etiology , Lithiasis/etiology , Tertiary Care Centers , OutpatientsABSTRACT
La terapia de privación androgénica (TPA) es el pilar del tratamiento del cáncer de próstata hormono-sensible metastásico (CPHSm). La adición de docetaxel o de nuevas terapias hormonales (abiraterona, apalutamida o enzalutamida) mejora la supervivencia global (SG) y es en la actualidad el estándar de tratamiento. Sin embargo, la decisión sobre el régimen específico que acompañe a la TPA debe ser discutida con el paciente teniendo en cuenta factores como las posibles toxicidades asociadas, la duración del tratamiento, las comorbilidades o sus preferencias, pues no hay evidencia suficiente para recomendar un régimen sobre otro en la mayoría de los casos. En este trabajo se resume la evidencia sobre el manejo del CPHSm y se aportan recomendaciones consensuadas sobre el tratamiento óptimo para añadir a la TPA en pacientes con CPHSm con especial atención al perfil clínico del paciente (AU)
Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the mainstay treatment for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). The addition of docetaxel or new hormone therapies (abiraterone, apalutamide, or enzalutamide) improves overall survival and is currently the standard of care. However, the decision on the specific regimen to accompany ADT should be discussed with the patient, considering factors such as possible associated toxicities, duration of treatment, comorbidities, patient preferences, as there is no sufficient evidence to recommend one regimen over the other in most cases. This paper summarizes the evidence on the management of mHSPC and provides consensus recommendations on the optimal treatment in combination with ADT in mHSPC patients, with special attention to the patient's clinical profile (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Interdisciplinary Research , Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Patient Safety , Consensus Development Conferences as Topic , Neoplasm Metastasis , Decision MakingABSTRACT
Objetivo La litiasis urinaria es una enfermedad prevalente y con elevado impacto socioeconómico, donde la cirugía endourológica ha demostrado excelentes resultados con mínimas complicaciones. Por su parte, la cirugía ambulatoria es un modelo asistencial eficiente, seguro y de calidad. Presentamos nuestra experiencia en el tratamiento endourológico ambulatorio de la litiasis renoureteral y una revisión de las principales series. Material y métodos Análisis prospectivo de 85 procedimientos flexibles o percutáneos para el tratamiento de la litiasis, llevados a cabo en nuestro centro entre enero de 2021 y abril de 2022. Se estableció como objetivo principal analizar la tasa de ingreso no planificado y como objetivos secundarios el éxito e incidencia de complicaciones. Los pacientes fueron seleccionados siguiendo los criterios del proceso asistencial. Resultados La edad media fue de 56±14 años. El urocultivo fue positivo en 13,9% de los pacientes, siendo portadores de doble J prequirúrgico 38%. Mediana de superficie litiásica de 55 mm2, con 961±323 Unidades Hounsfield. Se realizaron 73 procedimientos flexibles y 12 percutáneos. Ocho pacientes requirieron ingreso no planificado inmediato y otros dos durante el primer mes. Al tercer mes, 94% se encontraban libre de litiasis. No se detectaron complicaciones intraoperatorias, aunque 16,5% de los pacientes presentaron algún tipo de complicación postoperatoria. Conclusión En nuestra experiencia, con una estricta selección de los pacientes y siguiendo un proceso asistencial con participación multidisciplinar, los procedimientos endourológicos son factibles y seguros en el ámbito ambulatorio. La monitorización periódica de los resultados es fundamental en aras de una mejora constante del proceso (AU)
Objective Urinary lithiasis is a prevalent disease with a high socioeconomic impact, where endourological surgery has shown excellent results with minimal complications. For its part, outpatient surgery is an efficient, safe and quality care model. We present our experience in the outpatient endourological treatment of lithiasis and a review of the main series. Material and methods Prospective analysis of 85 flexible or percutaneous procedures for the treatment of lithiasis, carried out in our center between January 2021 and April 2022. The main objective was to analyze the rate of unplanned admission and the success and incidence of complications as secondary objectives. The patients were selected following the inclusion criteria of the care process. Results The mean age was 56±14 years. Urine culture was positive in 13.9% of the patients, 38% had a pre-surgical double-J catheter. Median stone surface was 55 mm2 (961±323 Hounsfield Units). 73 flexible and 12 percutaneous procedures were performed. 8 patients required immediate unplanned admission and another 2 during the first month. 94% were stone-free at the third month. No intraoperative complications were detected, although 16.5% of the patients presented some type of postoperative complication. Conclusion In our experience, with a strict selection of patients and following a care process with multidisciplinary participation, endourological procedures are feasible and safe in the outpatient setting. Periodic monitoring of the results is essential for the sake of a constant improvement of the process (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Kidney Calculi/therapy , Ureteral Calculi/therapy , Prospective Studies , Tertiary Healthcare , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the mainstay treatment for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). The addition of docetaxel or new hormone therapies (abiraterone, apalutamide, or enzalutamide) improves overall survival and is currently the standard of care. However, the decision on the specific regimen to accompany ADT should be discussed with the patient, considering factors such as possible associated toxicities, duration of treatment, comorbidities, patient preferences, as there is no sufficient evidence to recommend one regimen over the other in most cases. This paper summarizes the evidence on the management of mHSPC and provides consensus recommendations on the optimal treatment in combination with ADT in mHSPC patients, with special attention to the patient's clinical profile.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome , Docetaxel/therapeutic use , Hormones/therapeutic useABSTRACT
Introducción y objetivo: La supervivencia y calidad de vida (QoL) de los pacientes con cáncer de próstata resistente a la castración no metastásico (CPRCnm) se deteriora de forma muy significativa cuando llegan a desarrollar metástasis. Los antiandrógenos de nueva generación (apalutamida, enzalutamida y darolutamida) pueden prolongar la supervivencia libre de metástasis (SLM) y la supervivencia global (SG) en estos pacientes, manteniendo su QoL.Material y método: Tras una revisión sistemática de la literatura, un comité científico alcanzó un consenso sobre recomendaciones sencillas y prácticas que unifiquen y mejoren el manejo de los pacientes con CPRCnm en las consultas de urología.Resultados: Se dan recomendaciones sobre la frecuencia de determinación de antígeno prostático específico (PSA) y pruebas de imagen en pacientes con CPRCnm. También se destaca la importancia de las comorbilidades en el paciente con CPRCnm y se ofrecen recomendaciones sobre la valoración funcional y de la QoL que se pueden llevar a cabo en la consulta de urología. Se revisa la eficacia, seguridad y efectos sobre la QoL de los antiandrógenos de nueva generación.Conclusiones: Para la evaluación del tratamiento de pacientes con CPRCnm, es necesario tener en cuenta no solo la edad, sino también las comorbilidades y la QoL. Los antiandrógenos de nueva generación son una opción de tratamiento segura y eficaz en los pacientes con CPRCnm. Las recomendaciones de trabajo pueden servir de ayuda para optimizar su manejo de los pacientes con CPRCnm en las consultas de urología. (AU)
Introduction and objective: Survival and quality of life (QoL) of patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) deteriorate significantly when they develop metastases. New generation antiandrogens (apalutamide, enzalutamide and darolutamide) can prolong metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) in these patients, maintaining their QoL.Material and methods: After the performance of a systematic review of the literature, a scientific committee reached a consensus on simple and practical recommendations to consolidate and improve the management of patients with nmCRPC in urology consultations.Results: Recommendations are made on the frequency of PSA determination and imaging tests in patients with nmCRPC. The importance of co-morbidities in patients with nmCRPC is also highlighted, and recommendations are also made on functional and QoL assessment that can be carried out during urology consultations. The efficacy, safety, and effects on QoL of new generation antiandrogens are reviewed.Conclusions: To evaluate treatment of patients with nmCRPC, it is necessary to consider co-morbidities and QoL, in addition to age. New generation antiandrogens are a safe and effective treatment option for patients with nmCRPC. The recommendations of this review can be helpful in optimizing the management of nmCRPC patients in urology consultations. (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/therapy , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome , Survival Analysis , Quality of Life , ProstatectomyABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Survival and quality of life (QoL) of patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) deteriorate significantly when they develop metastases. New generation antiandrogens (apalutamide, enzalutamide and darolutamide) can prolong metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) in these patients, maintaining their QoL. MATERIAL AND METHODS: After the performance of a systematic review of the literature, a scientific committee reached a consensus on simple and practical recommendations to consolidate and improve the management of patients with nmCRPC in urology consultations. RESULTS: Recommendations are made on the frequency of PSA determination and imaging tests in patients with nmCRPC. The importance of co-morbidities in patients with nmCRPC is also highlighted, and recommendations are also made on functional and QoL assessment that can be carried out during urology consultations. The efficacy, safety, and effects on QoL of new generation antiandrogens are reviewed. CONCLUSIONS: To evaluate treatment of patients with nmCRPC, it is necessary to consider co-morbidities and QoL, in addition to age. New generation antiandrogens are a safe and effective treatment option for patients with nmCRPC. The recommendations of this review can be helpful in optimizing the management of nmCRPC patients in urology consultations.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant , Androgen Antagonists , Humans , Male , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy , Quality of Life , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
PURPOSE: PCNL requires a lithotrite to efficiently break stones, and some devices include active suction to remove the fragments. We set out to determine the efficacy and safety of the Swiss LithoClast® Trilogy, in a prospective European multicentre evaluation and compared it to published stone clearance rates for Trilogy based on surface area (68.9 mm2/min) and using the 3D calculated stone volume (526.7 mm3/min). METHODS: Ten European centres participated in this prospective non-randomized study of Trilogy for PCNL. Objective measures of stone clearance rate, device malfunction, complications and stone-free rates were assessed. Each surgeon subjectively evaluated ergonomic and device effectiveness, on a 1-10 scale (10 = extremely ergonomic/effective) and compared to their usual lithotrite on a 1-10 scale (10 = extremely effective). RESULTS: One hundred and fifty seven PCNLs using Trilogy were included (53% male, 47% female; mean age 55 years, range 13-84 years). Mean stone clearance rate was 65.55 mm2/min or 945 mm3/min based on calculated 3D volume. Stone-free rate on fluoroscopy screening at the end of the procedure was 83%. Feedback for suction effectiveness was 9.0 with 9.1 for combination and 9.0 for overall effectiveness compared to lithotrite used previously. Ergonomic score was 8.1, the least satisfactory element. Complications included 13 (8.2%) Clavien-Dindo Grade II and 2 (1.3%) Grade III. Probe breakage was seen in 9 (5.7%), none required using a different lithotrite. CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated that Trilogy is highly effective at stone removal. From a user perspective, the device was perceived by surgeons to be highly effective overall and compared to the most commonly used previous lithotrite, with an excellent safety profile.
Subject(s)
Kidney Calculi/surgery , Nephrolithotomy, Percutaneous/instrumentation , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Equipment Design , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Young AdultABSTRACT
INTRODUCCIÓN Y OBJETIVOS: El objetivo primario del presente estudio es conocer la incidencia real de los tumores transicionales del tracto urinario superior (TTUS) en nuestro medio. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Estudio epidemiológico prospectivo y multicéntrico desarrollado en 31 centros hospitalarios españoles a través de la Plataforma de Investigación de Estudios Multicéntricos (PIEM) de la Asociación Española de Urología (AEU). El reclutamiento se inició el 01 de mayo de 2017, finalizando el 30 de abril de 2018. La base de datos final incluyó 402 casos válidos. El manejo estadístico de los datos se realizó mediante el software SPSS V 23 y EPIDAT V 3.4. RESULTADOS: Incidencia ajustada por edad a la población española de 3,27 casos/100.000 habitantes/año (2,93-3,61, IC 95%); para la población europea fue de 3,3 (2,96-3,66, IC 95%). La edad media al diagnóstico fue de 70 años, siendo el 77% de los pacientes varones. El diagnóstico fue incidental en el 34% de los casos. La localización más frecuente fue la pielocalicial (54%), seguida por el uréter distal (22%). La ureterorrenoscopia previa al tratamiento definitivo se realizó en 114 pacientes, modificando la indicación inicial del tratamiento en el 58% de los casos. La nefrectomía radical fue el tratamiento empleado en 311 pacientes; en 76 casos (20% del total) el tratamiento fue conservador. Se registraron complicaciones en el 69% de los casos tratados, la mayoría Clavien 1 y 2 (86% de todas las complicaciones). La mortalidad postoperatoria global fue de 1,76%, asociada únicamente a la realización de nefroureterectomía. CONCLUSIONES: La incidencia ajustada por edad de los TTUS es de 3,27 en España y de 3,3 en Europa. La ureterorrenoscopia como elemento de diagnóstico permite modificar la indicación inicial del tratamiento en el 58% de los pacientes
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The incidence of upper urinary tract tumors is currently unknown. The aim of this study is to determine the real incidence of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) in Spain. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A descriptive, prospective and multicenter epidemiological study was conducted in 31 Spanish facilities by means of the Platform for Multicenter Studies of the Spanish Association of Urology. Recruitment was opened from May 1st, 2017 to April 30th, 2018. The original database was exported directly from the electronic Data Collection Logbook on December 15th, 2018, with a total of 404 cases registered (402 valid cases after depuration). Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS software V 23 and EPIDAT V 3.4. RESULTS: The incidence adjusted to Spanish population from raw data was 3.27 cases per 100.000 inhabitants per year (2.93 - 3.61 95% CI) and 3,3 cases per 100.000 inhabitants per year (2.96-3.66 95%CI) when adjusted to European population by age. The mean age at diagnosis was 70 years, and 77% of patients were male. Thirty-four percent of patients had an incidental diagnosis. Tumors were most commonly located in the pyelocalyceal system (54%), followed by the distal ureter (22%). Prior ureteroscopy was performed in 114 patients: this technique modified the subsequent treatment indication in 58% of cases. Radical nephroureterectomy was performed in 311 patients. Kidney-sparing surgery was the elected treatment in 76 patients (20%). Complications were found in 69% of cases, most of them classified as Clavien 1 and 2 (86% of all complications). Postoperative mortality rate was 1.7%. CONCLUSIONS: UTUC adjusted incidence rate in Spain is 3.27 and 3.3 in Europe. Prior URS modified the treatment indication in 18% of patients. We found a 69% complication rate and a 1.7% mortality rate
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/epidemiology , Kidney Neoplasms/epidemiology , Ureteral Neoplasms/epidemiology , Epidemiologic Studies , Incidence , Prospective Studies , Spain/epidemiologyABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The incidence of upper urinary tract tumors is currently unknown. The aim of this study is to determine the real incidence of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) in Spain. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A descriptive, prospective and multicenter epidemiological study was conducted in 31 Spanish facilities by means of the Platform for Multicenter Studies of the Spanish Association of Urology. Recruitment was opened from May 1st, 2017 to April 30th, 2018. The original database was exported directly from the electronic Data Collection Logbook on December 15th, 2018, with a total of 404 cases registered (402 valid cases after depuration). Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS software v 23 and EPIDAT v 3.4. RESULTS: The incidence adjusted to Spanish population from raw data was 3.27 cases per 100.000 inhabitants per year (2.93 - 3.61 95% CI) and 3,3 cases per 100.000 inhabitants per year (2.96-3.66 95%CI) when adjusted to European population by age. The mean age at diagnosis was 70 years, and 77% of patients were male. Thirty-four percent of patients had an incidental diagnosis. Tumors were most commonly located in the pyelocalyceal system (54%), followed by the distal ureter (22%). Prior ureteroscopy was performed in 114 patients: this technique modified the subsequent treatment indication in 58% of cases. Radical nephroureterectomy was performed in 311 patients. Kidney-sparing surgery was the elected treatment in 76 patients (20%). Complications were found in 69% of cases, most of them classified as Clavien 1 and 2 (86% of all complications). Postoperative mortality rate was 1.7%. CONCLUSIONS: UTUC adjusted incidence rate in Spain is 3.27 and 3.3 in Europe. Prior URS modified the treatment indication in 18% of patients. We found a 69% complication rate and a 1.7% mortality rate.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/epidemiology , Kidney Neoplasms/epidemiology , Ureteral Neoplasms/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Epidemiologic Studies , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Spain/epidemiologyABSTRACT
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Urologists are at significant risk due to radiation exposure (RE) from endourological procedures for stone disease. Many techniques described have shown a reduction of RE. The purpose of this article is to review available protocols to decrease RE during such procedures and provide tips and tricks for their implementation. RECENT FINDINGS: Several low-radiation and radiation-free protocols for percutaneous nephrolithotomy and flexible ureteroscopy have been described as an attempt to reduce RE during surgery. Beginning with specific checklists to ensure adequate C-arm usage, fluoroless procedures are based on endoscopic assessment, tactile guidance, and use of ultrasound to avoid fluoroscopy. A specific preoperative checklist and low radiation or complete fluoroless radiation endourological procedures have shown to be effective, feasible, and safe. It is recommended for urologists to be aware of the risks of RE and apply the "ALARA" (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) protocols.
Subject(s)
Nephrolithotomy, Percutaneous/methods , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Radiation Exposure/prevention & control , Ureteroscopy/methods , Urinary Calculi/diagnostic imaging , Checklist , Fluoroscopy , Humans , Ultrasonography , Urinary Calculi/surgeryABSTRACT
Objetivo: Conocer el grado de formación en protección radiológica (PR) de los urólogos españoles que realizan técnicas endourológicas, así como analizar el empleo de medidas de control y protección frente a radiaciones ionizantes. Material y métodos: Encuesta realizada mediante la Plataforma de Investigación de Estudios Multicéntricos (PIEM) a los 1.894 asociados de la Asociación Española de Urología, entre abril y octubre de 2015. El cuestionario comprende 21 preguntas que interrogan sobre la actividad endourológica realizada, la formación en PR y el empleo de medidas protectoras y de dosimetría personal. Se obtuvo un 17% de respondedores, siendo finalmente válidas para análisis 238 encuestas. Resultados: El 63% de los encuestados no tenían ningún tipo de formación en PR, el 25% poseían acreditación de primer nivel y únicamente un 12% de segundo nivel. El empleo de dosimetría de solapa, muñeca y cristalino era realizada por un 57, 27 y 2% de los urólogos, respectivamente. El uso de medidas de protección frente a radiaciones resultó ser insuficiente. El 53% de los urólogos con mayor riesgo de exposición no tenían ninguna formación en PR, un 30% no usaban dosímetro de solapa y un 40% no empleaban ni delantal ni collar tiroideo durante los procedimientos endourológicos. Conclusiones: La formación en PR, el control de dosis y el empleo de medidas de protección frente a radiaciones ionizantes es insuficiente, incluso en aquellos profesionales más expuestos a radiaciones. Es fundamental corregir estas graves deficiencias en PR tanto a nivel individual como de servicios de urología, sociedades científicas y autoridades sanitarias
Objective: To discover the extent of training in radiological protection (RP) of Spanish urologists who perform endourological procedures, and to analyse the use of on ionising radiation control and protection measures. Material and methods: A survey conducted through the Plataforma de Investigación de Estudios Multicéntricos (PIEM) (Multicentre Study Research Platform) on the 1,894 associates of the Spanish Association of Urology, between April and October 2015. The questionnaire comprised 21 questions on endourological activity undertaken, RP training, and the use of protective measures, and personal dosimetry. Seventeen percent responded, and 238 surveys were eventually validated for study. Results: Sixty-three percent of the respondents had received no type of RP training, 25% had first level accreditation, and only 12% second level. Fifty-seven percent, 27%, and 2% of the urologists used flap, wrist and crystalline dosimetry respectively. Use of radiation protection measures was insufficient. Fifty-three percent of the urologists at greatest risk of exposure had had no training in RP, 30% did not use flap dosimetry, and 40% used neither an apron or thyroid collar during the endourological procedures. Conclusions: RP training, dosis monitoring, and the use of ionising radiation protective measures are insufficient, even by practitioners most exposed to radiation. It is essential that these serious shortcomings in RP are corrected, at the level of the individual, in urology departments, scientific societies, and the health authorities
Subject(s)
Humans , Radiation Protection/methods , Urologists/education , Radiation, Ionizing , Spain , Fluoroscopy/instrumentation , Radiation Protection/statistics & numerical data , Radiation Protection/standards , Epidemiology, Descriptive , Dosimetry/methodsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To discover the extent of training in radiological protection (RP) of Spanish urologists who perform endourological procedures, and to analyse the use of on ionising radiation control and protection measures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A survey conducted through the Plataforma de Investigación de Estudios Multicéntricos (PIEM) (Multicentre Study Research Platform) on the 1,894 associates of the Spanish Association of Urology, between April and October 2015. The questionnaire comprised 21 questions on endourological activity undertaken, RP training, and the use of protective measures, and personal dosimetry. Seventeen percent responded, and 238 surveys were eventually validated for study. RESULTS: Sixty-three percent of the respondents had received no type of RP training, 25% had first level accreditation, and only 12% second level. Fifty-seven percent, 27%, and 2% of the urologists used flap, wrist and crystalline dosimetry respectively. Use of radiation protection measures was insufficient. Fifty-three percent of the urologists at greatest risk of exposure had had no training in RP, 30% did not use flap dosimetry, and 40% used neither an apron or thyroid collar during the endourological procedures. CONCLUSIONS: RP training, dosis monitoring, and the use of ionising radiation protective measures are insufficient, even by practitioners most exposed to radiation. It is essential that these serious shortcomings in RP are corrected, at the level of the individual, in urology departments, scientific societies, and the health authorities.