Long-Term Second Malignancies in Prostate Cancer Patients Treated With Low-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy and Radical Prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: Second malignancy is a rare but potentially lethal event after prostate brachytherapy, but data remain scarce on its long-term risk. The objective of this study is to estimate the number of pelvic second malignancies following brachytherapy compared to radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients treated with low-dose 125I brachytherapy and RP in British Columbia from 1999 to 2010. Kaplan-Meier estimates for pelvic (bladder and rectum), invasive pelvic, any second malignancy, and death from any second malignancy were assessed. Cox multivariable analyses were performed adjusting for initial treatment type, age, post-RP adjuvant/salvage external beam radiation therapy status, and smoking history. RESULTS: Two thousand three hundred seventy-eight brachytherapy and 9089 RP patients were included. Median age was 66 years (interquartile range [IQR] 61-71) and 63 years (IQR 58-67), respectively. Median follow-up time to event or censured was 14 years (IQR 11.5-17.3). The Kaplan-Meier estimates for pelvic second malignancy at 15 and 20 years were 6.4% and 9.8%, respectively, after brachytherapy, and 3.2% and 4.2% after RP. Time to any second malignancy and time to death from any second malignancy were not significantly different (P > .05). On Cox multivariable analysis, brachytherapy, compared to surgery, was an independent factor for pelvic (hazard ratio [HR] 1.81 [95% CI 1.45-2.26], P < .001) and invasive pelvic second malignancy (HR 2.13 [95% CI 1.61-2.83], P < .001). Increased age and smoking were also associated with higher estimates of events (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: After adjustment for age, post-RP adjuvant/salvage external beam radiation therapy status, and smoking status, numerically higher long-term HRs of pelvic and invasive pelvic second malignancy in patients treated with brachytherapy compared to RP were noted.

Is Engineered Tissue the Future of Bladder Reconstruction: Con.

Tissue engineering, once promising, faces significant technical challenges. Current limitations impede progression of the field, as evidenced by clinical trial failures over the past decades. Existing established surgical techniques remain the only proven, successful, and durable methods for bladder reconstruction.

The genitourinary impacts of electronic cigarette use: a systematic review of the literature.

PURPOSE: Electronic cigarette (e-cig) use is prevalent. The health implications of e-cig use on the genitourinary (GU) system are uncertain. This systematic review aims to evaluate how e-cig use impacts the GU system. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and Ovid alongside citation searching. Review articles, non-English papers, animal model/cell line studies or articles only on combustible cigarettes were excluded. Quality assessment was undertaken using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklists. The primary endpoint was the impact of e-cig use on bladder cancer incidence. Secondary outcomes included urinary carcinogens, chronic kidney disease (CKD), reproductive disorders, and other GU diseases. RESULTS: The search yielded 244 articles, 28 were ultimately included. One study assessed risk of bladder cancer and found the use of e-cig was associated with an increased odds ratio of 1.577 for its diagnosis. Twenty-one articles measured potential urinary carcinogens-including crotonaldehyde and benzene-associated with bladder cancer. Two articles evaluated the association of e-cig use with CKD and reported mixed outcomes. Three articles reported on reproductive disorders, specifically, stuttering priapism and changes to sperm quantity and quality. One study reported on other GU diseases, specifically burns to the GU system. After quality assessment, all articles were deemed to be of acceptable quality for inclusion. CONCLUSIONS: E-cig use was associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer, increased exposure to carcinogenic compounds, mixed evidence on CKD, increased risk of reproductive disorders and burns to the GU system. Further studies are needed to understand long-term GU effects.

Exploring the patterns of practice and satisfaction among female urologists in Canada.

INTRODUCTION: Our aim was to explore the satisfaction, personal and professional challenges, and practice barriers among female urologists in Canada. METHODS: A literature review was completed to design our survey. Trends with respect to career and personal satisfaction were identified, including academic advancement, mentorship, professional challenges, workplace discrimination, family satisfaction, and remuneration, among others. These key themes were formatted into 44 questions, translated into French, and distributed electronically as a survey to 80 female urology staff across Canada. RESULTS: Sixty (75.0%) women completed the survey. Many had been in practice <5 years (44.1%) and 72.9% completed a fellowship. Overall, 96.6% of women were very or somewhat satisfied with their career. Seeing more time-consuming patients and financial constraints within the healthcare system were the greatest source of dissatisfaction. Two-thirds of respondents reported that they received significant mentorship and 40% found it difficult to find a mentor during their training. Overall, 65.0% experienced gender discrimination, most commonly from a colleague or a patient. Women who practiced in the community were more likely to report experiencing discrimination compared to women practicing in an academic setting (78.1% vs. 51.9%; p=0.034). Mean time for maternity leave was 17.1 (±8.3) weeks, and 30.2% reported a pregnancy-related complication triggered by their work. Overall, 66.1% would choose urology again. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to advocate for the wellness of female urologists. To accomplish this, we need to address the challenges revealed in the survey, including supporting women on maternity leave, improving mentorship, and prioritizing female urology leadership initiatives. We have established a formal circle of support within the urology community in Canada to achieve these goals.

Radiation exposure in prone vs. modified supine position during PCNL: Results with an anthropomorphic model.

INTRODUCTION: Radiation exposure during urological procedures is still of concern in the urology community. It has been reported that percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in supine position has less irradiation, as the puncture is mostly done under ultrasound guidance. However, it can also be done under fluoroscopy guidance. Unfortunately, data on radiation exposure during PCNL is lacking since they are often drawn from generalization and extrapolation, or they do not evaluate new procedures or different positions. The aim of our study was to compare the radiation dose depending on the position of the surgeon during PCNL. METHODS: A portable C-arm was used in standard mode (32 impulsions/second; 98 kV, 3.8 mA). Specific dosimeters were placed for lens, extremity, and torso. Anthropomorphic models and hand phantom models were used to reproduce the position of surgeon and patient (with same bone density as human) during PCNL in prone and modified supine position. Fluoroscopy time (FT) was six minutes to obtain higher exploitable signal, and the results are given for a FT of three minutes (more realistic). Ten percent of the FT is done with an angulation of 15 degrees and the rest in anteroposterior position. RESULTS: The equivalent doses (ED) are given in uSV (uncertainty k=2). During the modified supine position: neck, lens, right index finger, left thumb, and index finger received EDs of 99 (20%), 62 (18%), 437 (10%), 112 (12%), and 204 (10%), respectively. In a prone position, the phantom received ED on the neck, lens, right thumb and index finger, left thumb and index finger of 85 (20%), 92 (12%), 401 (10%), 585 (10%), 295 (10%), and 567 (10%), respectively. In both positions, the right hand seems more exposed than the left hand. CONCLUSIONS: The effective dose is 1.5- and 1.3-fold higher for lens and extremities, respectively, in prone position PCNL compared to modified supine position. Both positions are still well below the recommended limit for professional exposure.