Cocaine-related ischemic priapism. Systematic review and presentation of a single center series.

INTRODUCTION: Ischemic priapism is a medical emergency that, if not treated, could lead to permanent erectile dysfunction. The association between cocaine and priapism is well-known; however, data on patient characteristics, treatment, and outcomes is missing. This work aimed to answer the research question: What are the characteristics, management strategies, and erectile prognosis of patients consuming cocaine and presenting with priapism? METHODS: We conducted a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines and described our case series. RESULTS: Eight studies were selected for qualitative synthesis, presenting information on ten patients. In our case series, we showed information regarding four patients. From the systematic review, the mean presentation time was 42.6 h, and the mean number of procedures to solve priapism was 2,4; in our case series was 42.75 h and 2, respectively. CONCLUSION: Cocaine-related priapism might present with a delayed diagnosis, need more procedures to be managed, and have a worse prognosis. More extensive and prospective studies are required.

Grupos de riesgo de recidiva bioquímica tras prostatectomía radical de la Asociación Europea de Urología: validación externa e identificación de factores de riesgo de progresión y mortalidad / European Association of Urology biochemical recurrence risk groups after radical prostatectomy: external validation and identification of independent risk factors for progression and death

Contexto La EAU propuso una clasificación del riesgo de progresión y muerte en pacientes con recidiva bioquímica tras prostatectomía radical (PR). Objetivo Validar la clasificación de riesgo de RB de la EAU en nuestro contexto e identificar los factores asociados con la progresión y la muerte. Material y métodos Estudio multicéntrico, retrospectivo y observacional que incluyó a 2140 pacientes sometidos a PR entre 2011 y 2015. Los pacientes con RB fueron identificados y estratificados en grupos de riesgo bajo (TD-PSA >1 año y pGS <8) o alto (TD-PSA <=1 año o pGS=>8). Se calcularon la supervivencia libre de progresión por PSA y supervivencia libre de metástasis (SLP-PSA, SLM), la supervivencia cáncer específica y la supervivencia global (curvas de Kaplan Meier y log-rank test). Se identificaron factores de riesgo independientes (regresión de Cox). Resultados Un total de 427 pacientes experimentaron RB (32,3% de bajo riesgo y 67,7% de alto riesgo). La mediana de SLP-PSA fue de 135,0 m (IC 95% 129,63-140,94) y 115,0 m (IC 95% 104,02-125,98) (p < 0,001) para los grupos de bajo y alto riesgo, respectivamente. Hubo diferencias significativas en la SLM y la supervivencia global entre ambos grupos. El grupo de riesgo de RB de la EAU fue un factor independiente de progresión del PSA (HR 2,55; p 0,009). El tiempo transcurrido entre la PR y la RB fue un factor independiente de aparición de metástasis (HR 0,43; IC 95%: 0,18-0,99; p 0,044) y muerte (HR 0,17; IC 95%: 0,26-0,96; 23 p 0,048). Se hallaron diferencias en la SLM (p 0,001) y la supervivencia cáncer específica (p 0,004) para <12, ≥ 12-<36 y ≥36 meses transcurridos entre la PR y la RB. Otros factores independientes fueron la radioterapia de rescate precoz y el PSA en el momento de aparición de la RB (AU)

Background The EAU proposed a progression and death risk classification in patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy (PR). Objective To validate the EAU BCR-risk classification in our setting and to find factors related to progression and death. Material and methods Multicenter, retrospective, observational study including 2140 patients underwent RP between 2011 and 2015. Patients with BCR were identified and stratified in low risk (PSA-DT>1 yr and pGS <8) or high-risk (PSA-DT <=1 yr or pGS=>8) grouping. PSA and metastatic free survival (PSA-PFS, MFS), cancer specific survival and overall survival were calculated (Kaplan Meier curves and log-rank test). Independent risk factors were identified (Cox regression). Results 427 patients experienced BCR (32.3% low-risk and 67.7% high-risk). Median PSA-PFS was 135.0 mo (95% CI 129.63-140.94) and 115.0 mo (95% CI 104.02-125.98) (p < .001), for low and high-risk groups, respectively. There was also significant differences in MFS and overall survival. The EAU BCR risk grouping was independent factor for PSA-progression (HR 2.55, p 0.009). Time from PR to BCR, was an independent factor for metastasis onset (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.18-0.99; p 0.044) and death (HR 0.17, 95% CI 0.26.0.96; 23 p 0.048). Differences in MFS (p 0.001) and cancer specific survival (p 0.004) were found for <12, ≥12-<36 and≥36 months from PR to BCR. Others independent factors were early salvage radiotherapy and PSA at BCR. Conclusions High-risk group is a prognostic factor for biochemical progression, but it has a limited accuracy on MP and death in our setting. The inclusion of other factors could increase its predictive power (AU)

European Association of Urology biochemical recurrence risk groups after radical prostatectomy: External validation and identification of independent risk factors for progression and death.

BACKGROUND: The EAU proposed a progression and death risk classification in patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy (PR). OBJECTIVE: To validate the EAU BCR-risk classification in our setting and to find factors related to progression and death. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Multicenter, retrospective, observational study including 2140 patients underwent RP between 2011 and 2015. Patients with BCR were identified and stratified in low risk (PSA-DT >1yr and pGS <8) or high-risk (PSA-DT ≤1yr or pGS ≥8) grouping. PSA and metastatic free survival (PSA-PFS, MFS), cancer specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated (Kaplan Meier curves and log-rank test). Independent risk factors were identified (Cox regression). RESULTS: 427 patients experienced BCR (32.3% low-risk and 67.7% high-risk). Median PSA-PFS was 135,0 mo (95% CI 129,63-140,94) and 115,0 mo (95% CI 104,02-125,98) (p<0,001), for low and high-risk groups, respectively. There were also significant differences in MFS and OS. The EAU BCR risk grouping was independent factor for PSA-progression (HR 2.55, p 0.009). Time from PR to BCR, was an independent factor for metastasis onset (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.18-0.99; p 0.044) and death (HR 0.17, 95% CI 0.26.0.96; 23 p 0.048). Differences in MFS (p 0.001) and CSS (p 0.004) were found for <12, ≥12-<36 and ≥36 months from PR to BCR. Others independent factors were early salvage radiotherapy and PSA at BCR. CONCLUSIONS: High-risk group is a prognostic factor for biochemical progression, but it has a limited accuracy on MP and death in our setting. The inclusion of other factors could increase its predictive power.

Single-port retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomy: Initial description and standardisation of technique.

Introduction: Minimally invasive surgery has been established as the gold standard for the treatment of localised renal tumours. A retroperitoneal approach is a feasible option with advantages in posterior tumours and patients with previous abdominal surgeries. In this context, single-port retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomy (SPOR-PN) has not been widely explored and developed. We present this technique's description and our first results. Methods: We present a case series of nine patients undergoing SPOR-PN in a single institution. We used a multi-channel single-port access dispositive through a 35 mm incision below the 12th rib, a 30° two-dimensional laparoscope, curved graspers and needle drivers on the left hand and standard rigid material in the right hand. In all surgeries, we performed a complete renorrhaphy with the sliding-clip technique. The pain was evaluated through visual analogue scale (VAS) the day after surgery. Results: Patients' age ranged from 44 to 78 years. The median RENAL score was 5p, and the mean surgical time was 134 min. We performed an 'off-clamp' procedure on three patients. Among the patients who had renal artery clamped, the median ischaemia time was 18 min. The median in-hospital stay time was 48 h. Median VAS the day after surgery was 2. None of the anatomical pieces had positive borders. Only one complication was reported (Clavien IIIa). Conclusions: SPOR-PN is a feasible minimally invasive and nephron-sparing technique. The advantages of this procedure may not be only a better cosmetic appearance but also less post-operative pain. Further development and larger studies are needed.