Vapoenucleación prostática con láser Tulio. ¿Es igual de segura y efectiva en pacientes ancianos? Análisis por puntuación de propensión de los resultados funcionales y perioperatorios tempranos / Is thulium laser vapoenucleation of the prostate equally safe and effective in elderly patients? A propensity score matched analysis of early perioperative and functional outcomes

Objetivo: Evaluar la seguridad y efectividad de la vapoenucleación prostática con laser Tulio (TuLEP) en una cohorte seleccionada de pacientes ancianos en comparación con pacientes «más jóvenes».Material y métodosSe realizó un análisis retrospectivo de los pacientes consecutivos que se sometieron a TuLEP entre septiembre de 2018 y febrero de 2020. Tras aplicar los criterios de inclusión/exclusión, los pacientes se estratificaron según el punto de corte de 75 años sugerido por la OMS: el grupo A incluyó a los pacientes < 75 años; el grupo B incluyó a los pacientes > 75 años.La evaluación preoperatoria incluyó una consulta con el urólogo, el valor del antígeno prostático específico (PSA), el International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) y quality of life (QoL), ecografía transrectal para estimar el volumen prostático (PVol) y uroflujometría para evaluar los valores preoperatorios de maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) y average urinary flow rate (Qave), así como el volumen residual postmiccional (PVR). Se analizaron los datos perioperatorios y postoperatorios con un seguimiento de 3 meses.ResultadosTras el análisis de puntuación de propensión, 51 pacientes fueron emparejados 1:1 frente a otros 51 con base en PVol, PSA, Qmax, IPSS y QoL. Los pacientes eran comparables al inicio excluyendo la edad 65 (IQR 59-70) vs. 79 (IQR 77-82) años, Grupo A vs. grupo B, respectivamente (valor p < 0,001).No se encontraron diferencias en cuanto al descenso de la hemoglobina, la tasa de complicaciones, el tiempo de cateterismo y la duración de la estancia hospitalaria. Los pacientes del grupo A (más jóvenes) experimentaron una mejora significativamente mayor en cuanto al valor absoluto de Qmax, Qave y ΔQmax a los 30 días. A los 90 días de seguimiento, las diferencias entre los grupos desaparecieron.Durante los 90 días de seguimiento, no se encontraron diferencias significativas en la tasa de reingreso ni se requirieron reintervenciones. (AU)

Purpose: To evaluate if thulium laser vapoenucleation of the prostate (ThuVEP) is equally safe and effective in a selected cohort of elderly patients when compared to “younger” patients.Materials and MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients who underwent ThuVEP between September 2018 and February 2020. After application of the inclusion/exclusion criteria, patients were stratified according to the 75 years-old cut-off point suggested by the WHO. Group A included patients < 75 years-old; Group B included patients > 75 years-old.Preoperative assessment included urological consultation, prostate specific antigen (PSA), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and quality of life index, transrectal ultrasound to estimate prostate volume (PVol), and uroflowmetry to assess preoperative Qmax, Qave and post-void residual volume (PVR). Perioperative and postoperative data were analyzed during 3-month follow-up.ResultsAfter propensity-score analysis, 51 versus 51 patients were 1:1 matched according to PVol, PSA, Qmax, IPSS and QoL. Patients were comparable at baseline excluding age (65 (IQR 59-70) versus 79 (IQR 77-82) years, Group A versus B, respectively, p-value < 0.001).No differences were found in terms of hemoglobin drop, complications rate, catheterization time and length of hospital stay. Group A (younger) patients had more significant improvement in 30-days absolute Qmax, Qave and ΔQmax. At 90-days follow-up, the differences between the groups disappeared.Within the 90-days follow-up, no significant differences were found in the readmission rate, with no need of reinterventions. (AU)

Is thulium laser vapoenucleation of the prostate equally safe and effective in elderly patients? A propensity score matched analysis of early perioperative and functional outcomes. / Vapoenucleación prostática con láser Tulio. ¿Es igual de segura y efectiva en pacientes ancianos? Análisis por puntuación de propensión de los resultados funcionales y perioperatorios tempranos.

PURPOSE: To evaluate if thulium laser vapoenucleation of the prostate (ThuVEP) is equally safe and effective in a selected cohort of elderly patients when compared to "younger" patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients who underwent ThuVEP between September 2018 and February 2020. After application of the inclusion/exclusion criteria, patients were stratified according to the 75 years-old cut-off point suggested by the WHO. Group A included patients < 75 years-old; Group B included patients > 75 years-old. Preoperative assessment included urological consultation, prostate specific antigen (PSA), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and quality of life index, transrectal ultrasound to estimate prostate volume (PVol), and uroflowmetry to assess preoperative Qmax, Qave and post-void residual volume (PVR). Perioperative and postoperative data were analyzed during 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: After propensity-score analysis, 51 versus 51 patients were 1:1 matched according to PVol, PSA, Qmax, IPSS and QoL. Patients were comparable at baseline excluding age (65 (IQR 59-70) versus 79 (IQR 77-82) years, Group A versus B, respectively, p-value < 0.001). No differences were found in terms of hemoglobin drop, complications rate, catheterization time and length of hospital stay. Group A (younger) patients had more significant improvement in 30-days absolute Qmax, Qave and ΔQmax. At 90-days follow-up, the differences between the groups disappeared. Within the 90-days follow-up, no significant differences were found in the readmission rate, with no need of reinterventions. CONCLUSIONS: In our hands, even in elderly patients affected by BPH, ThuVEP appears to be a safe and effective treatment option.

Diagnostic pathway of the biopsy-naïve patient suspected for prostate cancer: Real-life scenario when multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging is not centralized.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to compare the pathway including multi-parametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (mpMRI) versus the one without mpMRI in detection of prostate cancer (PCa) when mpMRI is not centralized. MATERIALS: January 2019-March 2020: prospective data collection of trans-perineal prostate biopsies. Group A: biopsy-naïve patients who underwent mpMRI (at any institution) versus Group B: patients who did not. Within Group A, patients were stratified into those with negative mpMRI (mpMRI-, PIRADS v2.1=1-3, with PSA density <0.15 if PIRADS 3) who underwent standard biopsy (SB), versus those with positive mpMRI (mpMRI+, when PIRADS 3-5, with PSA density>0.15 if PIRADS 3) who underwent cognitive fusion biopsy. RESULTS: Two hundred and eighty one biopsies were analyzed. 153 patients underwent mpMRI (Group A). 98 mpMRI+ underwent fusion biopsy; 55 mpMRI- underwent SB. 128 Group B patients underwent SB. Overall PCa detection rate was 52.3% vs. 48.4% (Group A vs. B, P=0.5). Non-clinically-significant PCa was detected in 7.8 vs. 13.3% (Group A vs. B, P=0.1). Among the 98 mpMRI+ Group A patients only 2 had non clinically-significant disease. In 55 mpMRI- patients who underwent SB, 10 (18.2%) had clinically-significant PCa. Prostate volume predicted detection of PCa. In Group B, age and PSA predicted PCa. Sensitivity of mpMRI was 75.0% for all PCa, 85.3% for clinically-significant PCa. CONCLUSION: Higher detection of PCa and lower detection of non-clinically-significant PCa favored mpMRI pathway. A consistent number of clinically-significant PCa was diagnosed after a mpMRI-. Thus, in real-life scenario, mpMRI- does not obviate indication to biopsy when mpMRI is not centralized. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

[Primary absolute anorgasmy in the male. Report of three clinical cases]. / Anorgasmia primaria assoluta maschile. Considerazioni su tre casi clinici.

Primary absolute anorgasmia is the impossibility to have orgasm and ejaculation during wake or every kind of sexual activity, in men with normal erectile function and nocturnal emission. In this syndrome the nervous system is unimpaired; the frequency is very low, with a very small number of reported cases in literature. Andrologists are generally requested by the patients for the first clinical approach. They should collaborate with sexologists for the diagnosis and treatment. Personal experience in 3 cases of anejaculatory men aged between 28 and 34, observed in the years 1995-1996, is presented and the clinical features of the patients and therapeutic strategy described. In two cases a sexual behavioral therapy was performed with success; in the third an electrovibration was employed to obtain the first orgasmic sensation.

[Uretero-arterial fistula as a complication of vascular surgery]. / Fistola uretero-protesica come complicanza della chirurgia vascolare.

Urinary fistulae between ureter and iliac arteries are very uncommon. A case of fistula connecting ureter and bypass between iliac and femoral arteries is reported. This kind of surgical complication, due to arterial lesion during coxo-femoral arthroprosthesis implant has never been reported in the literature.