[Perineal prostate biopsy]. / Perineale Prostatabiopsie.

The prostate biopsy is an essential tool for diagnosing prostate cancer (PCa). While transrectal biopsy (TR-Bx) continues to be considered the gold standard in Germany, the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines increasingly recommend transperineal biopsy (TP-Bx) due to lower infection rates and higher tumor detection rates. This article provides an overview of the history and development of the perineal biopsy, compares TR-Bx and TP-Bx and discusses the need for antibiotic prophylaxis before TP-Bx. Current studies have shown that TP-Bx can be performed without antibiotic prophylaxis and new techniques such as robotic-assisted and vector biopsy show very precise results. The establishment of TP-Bx is being promoted by extrabudgetary funding and technological advancements, with the choice of biopsy method remaining an individual decision jointly made in dialogue with the patient.

Propensity score-matched evaluation of palliative transurethral resection and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for bladder outlet obstruction in patients with prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: While transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the standard-of-care, Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is widely accepted as a size-independent method for surgical treatment of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to bladder outlet obstruction (BOO). However, in an ageing society an increasing number of patients presents with BOO due to locally advanced prostate cancer. There is currently no guidelines recommendation as to the enucleation or resection technique. Therefore, we compared intraoperative performance, postoperative outcomes, and safety for palliative (p)TURP and (p)HoLEP. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, propensity score-matched analysis of 1373 and 2705 men who underwent TURP or HoLEP for LUTS/BOO between 2014 and 2021, respectively. Patients were matched for age, prostate size and preoperative international prostate symptom score (IPSS). Patients were stratified by technique and groups were compared for perioperative parameters, safety, and functional outcomes. RESULTS: While postoperative symptoms and urodynamic parameters improved irrespective of technique, we report significantly increased resection and enucleation times for palliative indication. For corresponding efficiency parameters, we observed a two-fold higher surgical performance (g/min) for both techniques in patients without prostate cancer. While adverse events were comparable between groups, we found a two-fold higher hemoglobin drop in palliative patients. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, there is no standard-of-care for patients with BOO and locally advanced prostate cancer. Our data show that both TURP and HoLEP offer adequate symptom improvement and comparable safety profiles. While HoLEP is feasible even in larger prostates, both procedures become more difficult in patients with prostate cancer. Taken together, this study covers an important gap in current literature, helping urological surgeons to make evidence-based decisions for the benefit of their patients.

Digital Therapeutics in Urology: An Innovative Approach to Patient Care and Management.

Digital therapeutics (DTx) are a new class of intervention involving evidence-based software applications and have been used in neurology and psychiatry. To assess the potential of DTx in urology, we conducted a survey to assess the current prevalence of the digital infrastructure required for DTx, areas of support expected by patients, and requirements for uptake. Between November 2022 and January 2023, we conducted an anonymized survey at two German academic centers among patients with urologic conditions. We found that among patients aged <65 yr versus ≥65 yr, digital devices including smartphones (93.6% vs 77.3%; p < 0.001), computers (80.4% vs 70.1%; p < 0.001), tablets (51.7% vs 38.1%; p < 0.001), and smartwatches (24.7% vs 7.7%; p < 0.001) are already widely used, especially in the younger age group. Apps (95.6% vs 74.4%; p < 0.001) and health apps (57.6% vs 30.4%; p < 0.001) are already frequently used, but certified DTx apps are not (7.3% vs 5.4%; p = 0.25). Patients favor solutions that provide access to validated information (49.6%), give medical advice based on data or symptoms captured by the app (43.0%), or replace a physiotherapist (41.7%). Patients feel that optimization of therapy (78.4%), significant positive health outcomes (76.9%), and better patient autonomy (73.4%) are important requirements for DTx in urology. Regulatory and reimbursement changes mean that DTx might play an increasing role in urology. Patient summary: Patients can use digital therapeutics (DTx), which are mainly smartphone apps, to improve their health status or treat medical conditions. We assessed the current and future use of DTx in urology. Patients are already widely using smartphones and frequently use uncertified health apps, but do not use DTx. Patients would like to use DTx to optimize therapy that provides a significant health improvement.

Gender Bias in Urology: How Do Patients Really Choose Their Urologist?

Purpose: The present study aimed to investigate the influence of patients' and urologists' gender when choosing a urologist. With rising population diversity through immigration and generational differences, patient-centered healthcare has recently moved to the focus of European healthcare systems. As healthcare in urology often concentrates on sensitive topics, and often involves gender-specific diseases, research on the influence of gender on decision-making processes is of high importance. Understanding influence of gender on patients' choices in real life would provide patients, and physicians alike, with the means to provide better resources to achieve greater satisfaction from visits to a urologist. Patients and Methods: A questionnaire was prepared, and patients at our tertiary referral center were given the opportunity to voluntarily participate in our survey. We collected questionnaires from 1012 patients during their visits from June 2021 to October 2021. Results: Patients were divided into groups according to their gender: male (n=763), female (n=246), and non-binary (n=3). Our patient cohort consisted of more men than women (75% vs 24%), with only three patients identifying as non-binary. Irrespective of the patients' own gender, patients preferred a male urologist when problems were considered embarrassing, limiting daily activities, or when worrisome. When problems were considered painful, all patients preferred a female urologist. When patients had had a previous positive experience with a female or male urologist, they preferred to be treated by a female or male urologist, respectively. Overall, 65% of patients stated a gender preference for at least one given situation, or consultation scenario. Conclusion: As the majority of our patients stated a gender preference, urological departments should be considerate of potential patients' preferences for urologist gender that may be based on the individual patient's history, taking a comprehensive approach to fulfill the patients' need for same gender urologists in educational hospitals and health care services.

Choosing a Specialist: An Explanatory Study of Factors Influencing Patients in Choosing a Urologist.

OBJECTIVES: While research on doctor-patient interaction has often focused on the decision-making abilities of physicians, it rarely centers around the question of how patients choose their respective practitioners. Research on fundamental decision processes is of high importance and understanding the factors that influence people's choices in real-life decision-making would potentially provide patients, and physicians alike, with the means to provide better resources to achieve greater satisfaction from visits to a medical practitioner. METHODS: At our tertiary referral center, patients were given the opportunity to voluntarily participate in our survey. We collected questionnaires from 1,002 patients during their visit from November 2018 to February 2020. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS V26.0 software (SPSS Statistics, Version 26.0.; IBM, Armonk, NY, USA). Results are reported as percentages for categorial variables. RESULTS: Our patient cohort consisted of a higher percentage of men than of women (82 vs. 18%) with significantly more men having a university-based education (44 vs. 31%; p = 0.001). Women were more likely to have statutory health insurance than men (85 vs. 74%; p = 0.013). Men significantly preferred to be treated by a doctor of the same sex (24 vs. 8%; p < 0.001), which significantly increased with age. Overall, more women than men trusted a referral by their primary care physician (75 vs. 66%, p = 0.017), while preference of a higher academic degree in the attending urologist was significantly correlated with the patients' education. CONCLUSIONS: Information on a specialist, such as professional qualifications and academic accomplishments, is easily accessible to patients with or without access to the Internet. However, recommendations and referrals, in addition to consistent care by the same treating physician, seem to be of high importance to all patients, regardless of gender or age.