Open versus robotic partial nephrectomy in obese patients: a multi-institutional propensity score-matched analysis (UroCCR 43-Robese study).

INTRODUCTION: There is limited evidence on the outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) and open partial nephrectomy (OPN) in obese patients (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2). In this study, we aimed to compare perioperative and oncological outcomes of RPN and OPN. METHODS: We relied on data from patients who underwent PN from 2009 to 2017 at 16 departments of urology participating in the UroCCR network, which were collected prospectively. In an effort to adjust for potential confounders, a propensity-score matching was performed. Perioperative outcomes were compared between OPN and RPN patients. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS: Overall, 1277 obese patients (932 robotic and 345 open were included. After propensity score matching, 166 OPN and 166 RPN individuals were considered for the study purposes; no statistically significant difference among baseline demographic or tumor-specific characteristics was present. A higher overall complication rate and major complications rate were recorded in the OPN group (37 vs. 25%, p = 0.01 and 21 vs. 10%, p = 0.007; respectively). The length of stay was also significantly longer in the OPN group, before and after propensity-score matching (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in Warm ischemia time (p = 0.66), absolute change in eGFR (p = 0.45) and positive surgical margins (p = 0.12). At a median postoperative follow-up period of 24 (8-40) months, DFS and OS were similar in the two groups (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, RPN was associated with better perioperative outcomes (improvement of major complications rate and LOS) than OPN. The oncological outcomes were found to be similar between the two approaches.

Chatbots vs andrologists: Testing 25 clinical cases.

OBJECTIVE: AI-derived language models are booming, and their place in medicine is undefined. The aim of our study is to compare responses to andrology clinical cases, between chatbots and andrologists, to assess the reliability of these technologies. MATERIAL AND METHOD: We analyzed the responses of 32 experts, 18 residents and three chatbots (ChatGPT v3.5, v4 and Bard) to 25 andrology clinical cases. Responses were assessed on a Likert scale ranging from 0 to 2 for each question (0-false response or no response; 1-partially correct response, 2- correct response), on the basis of the latest national or, in the absence of such, international recommendations. We compared the averages obtained for all cases by the different groups. RESULTS: Experts obtained a higher mean score (m=11/12.4 σ=1.4) than ChatGPT v4 (m=10.7/12.4 σ=2.2, p=0.6475), ChatGPT v3.5 (m=9.5/12.4 σ=2.1, p=0.0062) and Bard (m=7.2/12.4 σ=3.3, p<0.0001). Residents obtained a mean score (m=9.4/12.4 σ=1.7) higher than Bard (m=7.2/12.4 σ=3.3, p=0.0053) but lower than ChatGPT v3.5 (m=9.5/12.4 σ=2.1, p=0.8393) and v4 (m=10.7/12.4 σ=2.2, p=0.0183) and experts (m=11.0/12.4 σ=1.4,p=0.0009). ChatGPT v4 performance (m=10.7 σ=2.2) was better than ChatGPT v3.5 (m=9.5, σ=2.1, p=0.0476) and Bard performance (m=7.2 σ=3.3, p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: The use of chatbots in medicine could be relevant. More studies are needed to integrate them into clinical practice.

Radical Prostatectomy for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer in Renal Transplant Recipients: Outcomes for a Large Contemporary Cohort and a Matched Comparison to Patients Without a Transplant.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: It is unknown whether renal transplant receipt (RTR) status can affect perioperative and oncological outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP). Our aim was to evaluate oncological and functional outcomes of RTR patients treated with RP for cN0M0 prostate cancer (PCa) via comparison with a no-RTR cohort. METHODS: RTR patients who had undergone RP at seven European institutions during 2001-2022 were identified. A multi-institutional cohort of no-RTR patients treated with RP during 2004-2022 served as the comparator group. Propensity score matching (PSM) at a ratio of 1:4 was used to match no-RTR patients to the RTR cohort according to age, prostate-specific antigen, and final pathology features. We used Kaplan-Meier plots and multivariable Cox, logistic, and Poisson log-linear regression models to test the outcomes of interest. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: After PSM, we analyzed data for 102 RTR and 408 no-RTR patients. RTR patients experienced higher estimated blood loss (EBL), longer length of hospital stay (LOS) and time to catheter removal, higher postoperative complication rates, and a lower continence recovery rate (all p < 0.001). On multivariable analyses, RTR independently predicted unfavorable operative time (odds ratio [OR] 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-1.25), LOS (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.32-1.86), EBL (OR 2.24, 95% CI 2.18-2.30), and time to catheter removal (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.68-2.21), but not complications or continence recovery. There were no significant differences for any oncological outcomes (biochemical recurrence, local or systemic progression) between the RTR and no-RTR groups. While no PCa deaths were recorded, the overall mortality rate was significantly higher in the RTR group (17% vs 0.5%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Although RP is feasible for RTR patients, the procedure poses non-negligible surgical challenges, with longer operative time and LOS and higher EBL, but no major differences in terms of complications and continence recovery. The RTR group had similar oncological outcomes to the no-RTR group but significantly higher overall mortality related to causes other than PCa. Therefore, careful selection for RP is required among candidates with previous RTR. PATIENT SUMMARY: Removal of the prostate for prostate cancer is possible in patients who have had a kidney transplant, and cancer control outcomes are comparable to those for the general population. However, transplant patients have a higher risk of death from causes other than prostate cancer and the prostate surgery is likely to be more challenging.

Gain of Chromosome 5q Predicts a Favorable Prognosis in Localized Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Approximately 65% of renal cell carcinomas (RCC) are diagnosed at a localized stage. We investigated the chromosome 5q gain impact on disease-free survival (DFS) in RCC patients. Overall, 676 patients with stages 1-2 RCC and having cytogenetic analysis were included. Gain of 5q was observed in 108 patients, more frequently in clear cell (ccRCC) than non-clear cell tumors. Gain of 5q is likely an independent prognostic factor since the concerned patients had a decreased recurrence risk in stages 1-2 RCC, confirmed in multivariable analysis. Detecting 5q gain could enhance recurrence risk assessment, allowing tailored post-surgery surveillance, and reducing unnecessary treatments.