Chronic Scrotal Content Pain: a Review of the Literature and Management Schemes.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Chronic scrotal content pain (CSCP) is a complex condition with multiple etiologies that requires a thorough understanding of its pathophysiology, workup, and treatment options. We performed a comprehensive and contemporary review to augment our current understanding of CSCP. RECENT FINDINGS: We discuss new advances in CSCP-specific pain questionnaires, modern studies of microscopic spermatic cord denervation and its variations, and novel techniques including electric nerve stimulation and cryoablation in addition to randomized control trials with significant negative findings. We also present literature focusing on the prevention of CSCP secondary to surgical iatrogenic causes. The constantly evolving literature of CSCP has led to the significant evolution in its diagnosis and treatment, from oral medications to salvage options after microscopic spermatic cord denervation. With each advance, we come closer to developing a more thorough, evidence-based algorithm to guide urologists in treatment of CSCP.

A deep-learning model using automated performance metrics and clinical features to predict urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

OBJECTIVES: To predict urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) using a deep learning (DL) model, which was then used to evaluate surgeon's historical patient outcomes. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Robotic surgical automated performance metrics (APMs) during RARP, and patient clinicopathological and continence data were captured prospectively from 100 contemporary RARPs. We used a DL model (DeepSurv) to predict postoperative urinary continence. Model features were ranked based on their importance in prediction. We stratified eight surgeons based on the five top-ranked features. The top four surgeons were categorized in 'Group 1/APMs', while the remaining four were categorized in 'Group 2/APMs'. A separate historical cohort of RARPs (January 2015 to August 2016) performed by these two surgeon groups was then used for comparison. Concordance index (C-index) and mean absolute error (MAE) were used to measure the model's prediction performance. Outcomes of historical cases were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis, chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: Continence was attained in 79 patients (79%) after a median of 126 days. The DL model achieved a C-index of 0.6 and an MAE of 85.9 in predicting continence. APMs were ranked higher by the model than clinicopathological features. In the historical cohort, patients in Group 1/APMs had superior rates of urinary continence at 3 and 6 months postoperatively (47.5 vs 36.7%, P = 0.034, and 68.3 vs 59.2%, P = 0.047, respectively). CONCLUSION: Using APMs and clinicopathological data, the DeepSurv DL model was able to predict continence after RARP. In this feasibility study, surgeons with more efficient APMs achieved higher continence rates at 3 and 6 months after RARP.

Experts vs super-experts: differences in automated performance metrics and clinical outcomes for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate automated performance metrics (APMs) and clinical data of experts and super-experts for four cardinal steps of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP): bladder neck dissection; pedicle dissection; prostate apex dissection; and vesico-urethral anastomosis. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We captured APMs (motion tracking and system events data) and synchronized surgical video during RARP. APMs were compared between two experience levels: experts (100-750 cases) and super-experts (2100-3500 cases). Clinical outcomes (peri-operative, oncological and functional) were then compared between the two groups. APMs and outcomes were analysed for 125 RARPs using multi-level mixed-effect modelling. RESULTS: For the four cardinal steps selected, super-experts showed differences in select APMs compared with experts (P < 0.05). Despite similar PSA and Gleason scores, super-experts outperformed experts clinically with regard to peri-operative outcomes, with a greater lymph node yield of 22.6 vs 14.9 nodes, respectively (P < 0.01), less blood loss (125 vs 130 mL, respectively; P < 0.01), and fewer readmissions at 30 days (1% vs 13%, respectively; P = 0.02). A similar but nonsignificant trend was seen for oncological and functional outcomes, with super-experts having a lower rate of biochemical recurrence compared with experts (5% vs 15%, respectively; P = 0.13) and a higher continence rate at 3 months (36% vs 18%, respectively; P = 0.14). CONCLUSION: We found that experts and super-experts differed significantly in select APMs for the four cardinal steps of RARP, indicating that surgeons do continue to improve in performance even after achieving expertise. We hope ultimately to identify associations between APMs and clinical outcomes to tailor interventions to surgeons and optimize patient outcomes.

Crowdsourced versus expert evaluations of the vesico-urethral anastomosis in the robotic radical prostatectomy: is one superior at discriminating differences in automated performance metrics?

Crowdsourcing from the general population is an efficient, inexpensive method of surgical performance evaluation. In this study, we compared the discriminatory ability of experts and crowdsourced evaluators (the Crowd) to detect differences in robotic automated performance metrics (APMs). APMs (instrument motion tracking and events data directly from the robot system) of anterior vesico-urethral anastomoses (VUAs) of robotic radical prostatectomies were captured by the dVLogger (Intuitive Surgical). Crowdsourced evaluators and four expert surgeons evaluated video footage using the Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS) (individual domains and total score). Cases were then stratified into performance groups (high versus low quality) for each evaluator based on GEARS. APMs from each group were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. 25 VUAs performed by 11 surgeons were evaluated. The Crowd displayed moderate correlation with averaged expert scores for all GEARS domains (r > 0.58, p < 0.01). Bland-Altman analysis showed a narrower total GEARS score distribution by the Crowd compared to experts. APMs compared amongst performance groups for each evaluator showed that through GEARS scoring, the most common differentiated metric by evaluators was the velocity of the dominant instrument arm. The Crowd outperformed two out of four expert evaluators by discriminating differences in three APMs using total GEARS scores. The Crowd assigns a narrower range of GEARS scores compared to experts but maintains overall agreement with experts. The discriminatory ability of the Crowd at discerning differences in robotic movements (via APMs) through GEARS scoring is quite refined, rivaling that of expert evaluators.

Use of Automated Performance Metrics to Measure Surgeon Performance during Robotic Vesicourethral Anastomosis and Methodical Development of a Training Tutorial.

PURPOSE: We sought to develop and validate automated performance metrics to measure surgeon performance of vesicourethral anastomosis during robotic assisted radical prostatectomy. Furthermore, we sought to methodically develop a standardized training tutorial for robotic vesicourethral anastomosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We captured automated performance metrics for motion tracking and system events data, and synchronized surgical video during robotic assisted radical prostatectomy. Nonautomated performance metrics were manually annotated by video review. Automated and nonautomated performance metrics were compared between experts with 100 or more console cases and novices with fewer than 100 cases. Needle driving gestures were classified and compared. We then applied task deconstruction, cognitive task analysis and Delphi methodology to develop a standardized robotic vesicourethral anastomosis tutorial. RESULTS: We analyzed 70 vesicourethral anastomoses with a total of 1,745 stitches. For automated performance metrics experts outperformed novices in completion time (p <0.01), EndoWrist® articulation (p <0.03), instrument movement efficiency (p <0.02) and camera manipulation (p <0.01). For nonautomated performance metrics experts had more optimal needle to needle driver positioning, fewer needle driving attempts, a more optimal needle entry angle and less tissue trauma (each p <0.01). We identified 14 common robotic needle driving gestures. Random gestures were associated with lower efficiency (p <0.01), more attempts (p <0.04) and more trauma (p <0.01). The finalized tutorial contained 66 statements and figures. Consensus among 8 expert surgeons was achieved after 2 rounds, including among 58 (88%) after round 1 and 8 (12%) after round 2. CONCLUSIONS: Automated performance metrics can distinguish surgeon expertise during vesicourethral anastomosis. The expert vesicourethral anastomosis technique was associated with more efficient movement and less tissue trauma. Standardizing robotic vesicourethral anastomosis and using a methodically developed tutorial may help improve robotic surgical training.

Utilizing Machine Learning and Automated Performance Metrics to Evaluate Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy Performance and Predict Outcomes.

PURPOSE: Surgical performance is critical for clinical outcomes. We present a novel machine learning (ML) method of processing automated performance metrics (APMs) to evaluate surgical performance and predict clinical outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We trained three ML algorithms utilizing APMs directly from robot system data (training material) and hospital length of stay (LOS; training label) (≤2 days and >2 days) from 78 RARP cases, and selected the algorithm with the best performance. The selected algorithm categorized the cases as "Predicted as expected LOS (pExp-LOS)" and "Predicted as extended LOS (pExt-LOS)." We compared postoperative outcomes of the two groups (Kruskal-Wallis/Fisher's exact tests). The algorithm then predicted individual clinical outcomes, which we compared with actual outcomes (Spearman's correlation/Fisher's exact tests). Finally, we identified five most relevant APMs adopted by the algorithm during predicting. RESULTS: The "Random Forest-50" (RF-50) algorithm had the best performance, reaching 87.2% accuracy in predicting LOS (73 cases as "pExp-LOS" and 5 cases as "pExt-LOS"). The "pExp-LOS" cases outperformed the "pExt-LOS" cases in surgery time (3.7 hours vs 4.6 hours, p = 0.007), LOS (2 days vs 4 days, p = 0.02), and Foley duration (9 days vs 14 days, p = 0.02). Patient outcomes predicted by the algorithm had significant association with the "ground truth" in surgery time (p < 0.001, r = 0.73), LOS (p = 0.05, r = 0.52), and Foley duration (p < 0.001, r = 0.45). The five most relevant APMs, adopted by the RF-50 algorithm in predicting, were largely related to camera manipulation. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, ours is the first study to show that APMs and ML algorithms may help assess surgical RARP performance and predict clinical outcomes. With further accrual of clinical data (oncologic and functional data), this process will become increasingly relevant and valuable in surgical assessment and training.

Outpatient Laparoscopic Appendectomy: Feasible in a Public County Hospital?

BACKGROUND: Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy is being used increasingly as a treatment option for acute, uncomplicated appendicitis. This was a prospective validation study in a large, urban, public safety-net hospital. STUDY DESIGN: From 2014 to 2016, all patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for acute, uncomplicated appendicitis were enrolled in a prospective observational trial. Standard baseline perioperative practice (control group) was documented for 1 year. An outpatient appendectomy protocol was then introduced. Inclusion criteria required intraoperative confirmation of uncomplicated appendicitis and strict discharge criteria, including physician assessment before discharge. Data collection then continued for 1 year (outpatient group). The outcomes measures examined included complications, length of stay, nursing transitions, emergency department visits, readmissions, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: The study enrolled 351 patients (178 control, 173 outpatient). Of the 173 candidates for outpatient appendectomy, 113 went home. Reasons for admission included surgeon discretion due to intraoperative findings/medical comorbidities and lack of transportation home. The outpatient group had shorter operative time (69 vs 83 minutes; p < 0.001), longer time in recovery (242 vs 141 minutes; p < 0.001), fewer nursing transitions (4 vs 5; p < 0.001), and shorter postoperative length of stay (9 vs 19 hours; p < 0.001). There was no difference in complications, emergency department visits, or readmissions. In the outpatient group, none of the patients sent home from recovery had postoperative complications or required readmission. Satisfaction surveys revealed no change in satisfaction with either protocol. CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient appendectomy is safe in a public hospital and results in shorter hospital length of stay and decreased healthcare costs. Strict criteria for discharge are important to identify patients who should be admitted for observation.