Litiasis en receptores de trasplante renal: revisión sistemática / Kidney stones in renal transplant recipients: A systematic review

Introducción La litiasis en el receptor del injerto renal puede ser una enfermedad peligrosa cuyo riesgo potencial es el deterioro de la función renal. Adquisición de la evidencia Se realizó una búsqueda sistemática de la literatura hasta febrero del 2023. El objetivo primario era evaluar la incidencia de litiasis en receptores de trasplante renal (TR). El secundario era valorar el momento de formación, la localización y la composición de la litiasis, las opciones de tratamiento disponibles y la incidencia de la pérdida del injerto. Síntesis de la evidencia Un total de 41 estudios no aleatorizados compuestos por 699 pacientes cumplieron los criterios de inclusión. La edad en el momento del diagnóstico de la litiasis oscilaba entre 29 y 53 años. La incidencia de urolitiasis se encontraba entre 0,1 y 6,3%, siendo diagnosticada generalmente a los 12 meses del TR. La mayoría de las litiasis detectadas se localizaron en los cálices o en la pelvis. La composición más frecuente fue la de oxalato cálcico. Se consideraron diferentes estrategias de tratamiento como vigilancia activa, ureteroscopia, abordaje percutáneo/combinado o cirugía abierta. Del total de pacientes, 15,73% fueron tratados con litotricia extracorpórea por ondas de choque (LEOCh) y 26,75% se sometieron a litotricia endoscópica o extracción quirúrgica. De estos sujetos, 18,03% se abordaron mediante nefrolitotomía percutánea, mientras que 3,14% se sometieron a un manejo combinado. Se realizó litotomía quirúrgica en 5,01% de los casos. La tasa libre de litiasis (TLL) global se situó en torno a 80%. Conclusiones La litiasis en el TR es una patología poco frecuente que suele diagnosticarse al año de la cirugía. Su localización más común son los cálices y la pelvis renal, y en la mayoría de los casos está compuesta de oxalato cálcico. Todos los tratamientos activos han demostrado resultados satisfactorios en términos de TLL, ... . (AU)

Introduction Lithiasis in renal graft recipients might be a dangerous condition with a potential risk of organ function impairment. Evidence acquisition A systematic literature search was conducted through February 2023. The primary objective was to assess the incidence of lithiasis in kidney transplant (KT) recipients. The secondary objective was to assess the timing of stone formation, localization and composition of stones, possible treatment options, and the incidence of graft loss. Evidence synthesis A total of 41 non-randomized studies comprising 699 patients met our inclusion criteria. The age at lithiasis diagnosis ranged between 29-53 years. Incidence of urolithiasis ranged from 0.1 to 6.3%, usually diagnosed after 12 months from KT. Most of the stones were diagnosed in the calyces or in the pelvis. Calcium oxalate composition was the most frequent. Different treatment strategies were considered, namely active surveillance, ureteroscopy, percutaneous/combined approach, or open surgery. 15.73% of patients were submitted to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), while 26.75% underwent endoscopic lithotripsy or stone extraction. 18.03% of patients underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy whilst 3.14% to a combined approach. Surgical lithotomy was performed in 5.01% of the cases. Global stone-free rate was around 80%. Conclusions Lithiasis in kidney transplant is a rare condition usually diagnosed after one year after surgery and mostly located in the calyces and renal pelvis, more frequently of calcium oxalate composition. Each of the active treatments is associated with good results in terms of stone-free rate, thus the surgical technique should be chosen according to the patient's characteristics and surgeon preferences. (AU)

Kidney stones in renal transplant recipients: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Lithiasis in renal graft recipients might be a dangerous condition with a potential risk of organ function impairment. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic literature search was conducted through February 2023. The primary objective was to assess the incidence of lithiasis in kidney transplant (KT) recipients. The secondary objective was to assess the timing of stone formation, localization and composition of stones, possible treatment options, and the incidence of graft loss. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 41 non-randomized studies comprising 699 patients met our inclusion criteria. The age at lithiasis diagnosis ranged between 29-53 years. Incidence of urolithiasis ranged from 0.1-6.3%, usually diagnosed after 12 months from KT. Most of the stones were diagnosed in the calyces or in the pelvis. Calcium oxalate composition was the most frequent. Different treatment strategies were considered, namely active surveillance, ureteroscopy, percutaneous/combined approach, or open surgery. 15.73% of patients were submitted to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), while 26.75% underwent endoscopic lithotripsy or stone extraction. 18.03% of patients underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy whilst 3.14% to a combined approach. Surgical lithotomy was performed in 5.01% of the cases. Global stone-free rate was around 80%. CONCLUSIONS: Lithiasis in kidney transplant is a rare condition usually diagnosed after one year after surgery and mostly located in the calyces and renal pelvis, more frequently of calcium oxalate composition. Each of the active treatments is associated with good results in terms of stone-free rate, thus the surgical technique should be chosen according to the patient's characteristics and surgeon preferences.

Manejo de masas renales en receptores de trasplante renal. Revisión colaborativa de los grupos de trabajo de trasplante renal y cáncer renal de la sección de jóvenes urológos (YAU) de la Asociación Europea de Urología (EAU) / How to manage renal masses in kidney transplant recipients? A collaborative review by the EAU-YAU kidney transplantation and renal cancer working groups

Introducción: Los receptores de trasplante renal (TR) tienen al menos cuatro veces más riesgo de desarrollar neoplasias renales que la población general. Dado que estos pacientes suelen albergar tumores bilaterales o multifocales, el tratamiento de las masas renales sigue siendo un tema controvertido. Objetivo Explorar el tratamiento actual de las masas renales en riñones nativos de pacientes con TR. Adquisición de la evidencia Se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica en la base de datos Medline/PubMed y se incluyeron 34 estudios en la presente revisión. Síntesis de la evidencia La vigilancia activa es una opción terapéutica factible en pacientes frágiles con masas renales menores de 3 cm. Dado que la cirugía conservadora de nefronas no está justificada en el caso de masas en el riñón nativo, la nefrectomía radical es el tratamiento estándar para los tumores renales en riñones nativos de receptores de TR, con técnicas laparoscópicas asociadas a tasas de complicaciones perioperatorias significativamente menores en comparación con el abordaje abierto. La realización de nefrectomía bilateral de riñón nativo y TR en el mismo acto puede ser una opción terapéutica en pacientes con masa renal y enfermedad poliquística renal, particularmente ante la ausencia de diuresis residual. Los pacientes con enfermedad localizada y nefrectomía radical satisfactoria no requieren ajuste del tratamiento inmunosupresor. En los casos con metástasis, los agentes mTOR pueden garantizar una respuesta antitumoral eficaz, manteniendo a la vez el tratamiento inmunosupresor adecuado para proteger el injerto. Conclusiones El cáncer renal en riñones nativos postrasplante es un acontecimiento frecuente. La nefrectomía radical es el tratamiento de elección en masas renales localizadas. Aún no se ha implementado una estrategia de cribado estandarizada y ampliamente aprobada para las neoplasias malignas en las unidades renales nativas. (AU)

Introduction: Kidney transplant (KT) recipients have a four-times higher risk of renal malignancies compared to general population. As these patients frequently harbor bilateral or multifocal tumors, the management of renal masses is still under debate. Objective To explore the current management of the native kidney masses in KT patients.Acquisition of evidenceWe performed a literature search on MEDLINE/PubMed database. A number of 34 studies were included in the present review. Synthesis of evidence In frail patients with renal masses below 3 cm, active surveillance is a feasible alternative. Nephron-sparing surgery is not justified for masses in the native kidney. Radical nephrectomy is the standard treatment for post-transplant renal tumors of the native kidneys in KT recipients, with laparoscopic techniques leading to significantly less perioperative complication rates as compared to the open approach. Concurrent bilateral native nephrectomy at the time of transplantation can be considered in patients with renal mass and polycystic kidney disease, especially if no residual urinary output is present. Patients with localized disease and successful radical nephrectomy do not require immunosuppression adjustment. In metastatic cases, mTOR agents can ensure efficient antitumoral response, while maintaining proper immunosuppression in order to protect the graft. Conclusions Post-transplant renal cancer of the native kidneys is a frequent occurrence. Radical nephrectomy is most frequently performed for localized renal masses. A standardized and widely-approved screening strategy for malignancies of native renal units is yet to be implemented. (AU)

Trasplante renal abierto frente a trasplante renal asistido por robot: revisión sistemática del grupo de trabajo de trasplante renal de la sección de Jóvenes Urólogos Académicos (YAU) de la Asociación Europea de Urología (EAU) / Open versus robotic-assisted kidney transplantation: A systematic review by the European Association of Urology (EAU) – Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Kidney Transplant Working Group

Introducción En los últimos 20 años se ha evaluado el uso de la robótica en el campo del trasplante renal como abordaje miniinvasivo a esta población especialmente vulnerable. Al tratarse de un campo relativamente novedoso, pocos estudios han comparado el trasplante renal abierto (TRA) y el trasplante renal asistido por robot (TRAR), la mayoría en cohortes pequeñas. Para ampliar los conocimientos actuales, hemos querido reunir en este documento datos comparativos de TRA frente a TRAR en una revisión sistemática. Métodos Se realizó una revisión sistemática de acuerdo con la declaración de Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Se realizaron búsquedas en las bases de datos Medline, Embase y Cochrane para identificar todos los estudios que informaran sobre los resultados postoperatorios del TRAR frente al TRA. Resultados Un total de 2.136 pacientes de 13 estudios fueron incluidos. La mediana de edad de los receptores fue de 42,6 años (TRA: 43,5 años y TRAR: 40,3 años). La mediana de la tasa de trasplante renal preventivo fue de 27,1% (TRA: 23,3% y TRAR: 33,2%). La mediana del tiempo quirúrgico total y de recalentamiento fueron: 235 y 49 min, respectivamente, en la población TRA; 250 y 60 min en la población TRAR. Las tasas de complicaciones postoperatorias fueron: 26,2% en la población TRA y 17,8% en la población TRAR. Las tasas de retraso en la función del injerto fueron: 4,9% en la población TRA y 2,3 en la población TRAR. Los resultados funcionales a medio plazo y la supervivencia del paciente y del injerto fueron similares entre las poblaciones TRA y TRAR. Conclusión Esta revisión sistemática demostró que el TRAR puede asociarse a una menor incidencia de retraso en la función del injerto y de complicaciones quirúrgicas postoperatorias, así como a unos resultados funcionales a medio plazo y una supervivencia del paciente y del injerto similares, en comparación con el TRA para los pacientes con enfermedad renal terminal (AU)

Introduction In the last 20 years, robotic assisted procedures were evaluated in the field of kidney transplantation to provide a mini-invasive approach for this particularly fragile population. As a relatively new issue, few studies compared open kidney transplantation (OKT) and robotic-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT), mostly in small cohorts. To improve current knowledge, we wanted here to gather comparative data of OKT vs RAKT in a systematic review. Methods A systematic review was performed according to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify all studies reporting post-operative outcomes of RAKT versus OKT. Results A total of 2,136 patients in 13 studies were included. Median recipient age was 42.6 years (OKT: 43.5 years and RAKT: 40.3 years). Median preemptive kidney transplantation rate was 27.1% (OKT: 23.3% and RAKT: 33.2%). Median total operative time and rewarming were respectively: 235 and 49 minutes in OKT population; 250 and 60 minutes in RAKT population.Post-operative complications rates were: 26.2% in OKT population and 17.8% in RAKT population. Delayed graft function rates were: 4.9% in OKT population and 2.3 in RAKT population. Mid-term functional outcomes, patient and graft survival were similar in OKT and RAKT population. Conclusion This systematic review showed that RAKT may be associated with a lower incidence of delayed graft function and post-operative surgical complications and similar mid-term functional outcomes, patient and graft survival, compared to OKT for end-stage renal disease patients (AU)

[Bladder augmentation in the era of botulinum toxin: Indications and results]. / L'entérocystoplastie d'agrandissement à l'ère de la toxine botulique : indications et résultats.

AIM: To determine the surgical indication and results of bladder augmentation (BA) during the last decade in a neurourology center in the era of intradetrusor botulinum toxin injection. MATERIAL: We conducted a retrospective study that included patients with BA between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2022 in our centre. We collected pre-operative demographic, clinical, and urodynamic data, BA indication, and associated procedures. We analyzed early and late complications as well as continence and postoperative voiding mode in patients with first BA in a neurological pathology context. RESULTS: We performed 77 BA over the study period. The main indication was neurogenic overactive bladder, which was secondarily resistant to botulinum toxin. The main associated procedure was continent cutaneous diversion (n=31, 57.4%). Among patients who had a first BA for neurogenic bladder, 34 patients had early complications (50%) including 12 patients with≥Clavien 3 complications (17.6%). After a median follow-up of 33 [14; 55] months, 23 patients had late complications (33.8%) and 59 patients had complete continence (86.8%). CONCLUSION: In the era of botulinum toxin, the main indication of BA is the secondary failure of botulinum toxin for overactive neurogenic bladder. The BA provided continence in 86.8% of patients. It remains however an intervention with a significant rate of severe complications whose indication must be discussed by a multidisciplinary team. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Weak.

Trasplante renal en receptor pediátrico: consideraciones y estrategias de evaluación preoperatoria / Renal transplantation in pediatric recipients: Considerations and preoperative assessment strategies

Introducción y objetivo El trasplante renal en la población pediátrica difiere del trasplante en adultos en muchos aspectos. Esta revisión se centrará en los aspectos exclusivos del receptor pediátrico. Material y métodos Se realizó una revisión narrativa de la escasa literatura existente sobre la evaluación preoperatoria del trasplante renal en receptor pediátrico con un enfoque educativo. La búsqueda bibliográfica permitió identificar publicaciones en inglés entre enero de 2000 y octubre de 2022. Los estudios publicados se identificaron mediante búsquedas en las siguientes bases de datos electrónicas: PubMed (Medline), WHO/UNAIDS, Google-Scholar, Semantic-Scholar y Research Gate. En aras de la eficacia y la fiabilidad, se utilizaron ensayos controlados aleatorizados, metaanálisis, revisiones sistemáticas de alta calidad y estudios grandes recientes bien diseñados, si estaban disponibles. Se realizaron búsquedas en internet para obtener información pertinente adicional (definiciones, políticas o directrices). Resultados El manejo de las anomalías urogenitales congénitas y la disfunción del tracto urinario inferior, junto con la evaluación urológica pediátrica preoperatoria óptima para el trasplante renal en niños, se ha abordado según la bibliografía disponible. Adicionalmente, se han mencionado consideraciones particulares relativas al trasplante preventivo y al trasplante de un riñón de tamaño adulto en un lactante o un niño pequeño. Conclusiones Los resultados del trasplante renal en niños han mejorado progresivamente en los últimos 15años. El trasplante de donante vivo emparentado ofrece los mejores resultados, y el trasplante preventivo puede ayudar a evitar la diálisis. Las consideraciones quirúrgicas y médicas, tanto en el tratamiento pretrasplante como en el postrasplante del receptor renal pediátrico, son extremadamente importantes para obtener resultados mejores a corto y a largo plazo (AU)

Introduction and objective Renal transplantation in the pediatric population differs from adults in many aspects. This review will focus on the unique issues of the pediatric recipient. Material and methods A narrative review on the scarce literature regarding preoperative evaluation before kidney transplantation of the paediatric recipient with an educational focus was conducted. The literature search allowed for identification of publications in English from January 2000 to October 2022. Published studies were identified by searching the following electronic databases: PubMed (Medline), WHO/UNAIDS, Google-Scholar, Semantic-Scholar and Research Gate. For efficiency and reliability, recent randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, high quality systematic reviews and large well-designed studies were used if available. Internet searches were conducted for other relevant information (definitions, policies or guidelines). Results Management of congenital urogenital anomalies and lower urinary tract dysfunction along with optimal pediatric urological preoperative assessment for renal transplantation in children is addressed in the light of the available literature. Furthermore, particular considerations including pre-emptive transplantation, transplantation of an adult-size kidney into an infant or small child is discussed. Conclusions Outcomes of renal transplantation in children have shown progressive improvement over the past 15years. Transplantation with living related donor gives the best results and pre-emptive transplantation provides with benefits of avoiding dialysis. Surgical and medical considerations in both the pre-transplant and post-transplant management of the pediatric kidney recipient are extremely crucial in order to achieve better short and long-term results (AU)

How to manage renal masses in kidney transplant recipients? A collaborative review by the EAU-YAU kidney transplantation and renal cancer working groups.

INTRODUCTION: Kidney transplant (KT) recipients have a four-times higher risk of renal malignancies compared to general population. As these patients frequently harbor bilateral or multifocal tumors, the management of renal masses is still under debate. OBJECTIVE: To explore the current management of the native kidney masses in KT patients. ACQUISITION OF EVIDENCE: We performed a literature search on MEDLINE/PubMed database. A number of 34 studies were included in the present review. SYNTHESIS OF EVIDENCE: In frail patients with renal masses below 3 cm, active surveillance is a feasible alternative. Nephron-sparing surgery is not justified for masses in the native kidney. Radical nephrectomy is the standard treatment for post-transplant renal tumors of the native kidneys in KT recipients, with laparoscopic techniques leading to significantly less perioperative complication rates as compared to the open approach. Concurrent bilateral native nephrectomy at the time of transplantation can be considered in patients with renal mass and polycystic kidney disease, especially if no residual urinary output is present. Patients with localized disease and successful radical nephrectomy do not require immunosuppression adjustment. In metastatic cases, mTOR agents can ensure efficient antitumoral response, while maintaining proper immunosuppression in order to protect the graft. CONCLUSIONS: Post-transplant renal cancer of the native kidneys is a frequent occurrence. Radical nephrectomy is most frequently performed for localized renal masses. A standardized and widely-approved screening strategy for malignancies of native renal units is yet to be implemented.

Open versus robotic-assisted kidney transplantation: A systematic review by the European Association of Urology (EAU) - Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Kidney Transplant Working Group.

INTRODUCTION: In the last 20 years, robotic assisted procedures were evaluated in the field of kidney transplantation to provide a mini-invasive approach for this particularly fragile population. As a relatively new issue, few studies compared open kidney transplantation (OKT) and robotic-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT), mostly in small cohorts. To improve current knowledge, we wanted here to gather comparative data of OKT vs RAKT in a systematic review. METHODS: A systematic review was performed according to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify all studies reporting post-operative outcomes of RAKT versus OKT. RESULTS: A total of 2136 patients in 13 studies were included. Median recipient age was 42.6 years (OKT: 43.5 years and RAKT: 40.3 years). Median preemptive kidney transplantation rate was 27.1 % (OKT: 23.3 % and RAKT: 33.2 %). Median total operative time and rewarming were respectively: 235 and 49 min in OKT population; 250 and 60 min in RAKT population. Post-operative complications rates were: 26.2 % in OKT population and 17.8 % in RAKT population. Delayed graft function rates were: 4.9 % in OKT population and 2.3 in RAKT population. Mid-term functional outcomes, patient and graft survival were similar in OKT and RAKT population. CONCLUSION: This systematic review showed that RAKT may be associated with a lower incidence of delayed graft function and post-operative surgical complications and similar mid-term functional outcomes, patient and graft survival, compared to OKT for end-stage renal disease patients.

Renal transplantation in pediatric recipients: Considerations and preoperative assessment strategies.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Renal transplantation in the pediatric population differs from adults in many aspects. This review will focus on the unique issues of the pediatric recipient. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A narrative review on the scarce literature regarding preoperative evaluation before kidney transplantation of the paediatric recipient with an educational focus was conducted. The literature search allowed for identification of publications in English from January 2000 to October 2022. Published studies were identified by searching the following electronic databases: PubMed (MEDLINE), WHO/UNAIDS, Google-Scholar, Semantic-Scholar and Research Gate. For efficiency and reliability, recent randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, high quality systematic reviews and large well-designed studies were used if available. Internet searches were conducted for other relevant information (definitions, policies or guidelines). RESULTS: Management of congenital urogenital anomalies and lower urinary tract dysfunction along with optimal pediatric urological preoperative assessment for renal transplantation in children is addressed in the light of the available literature. Furthermore, particular considerations including pre-emptive transplantation, transplantation of an adult-size kidney into an infant or small child is discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes of RT in children have shown progressive improvement over the past 15 years. Transplantation with living related donor gives the best results and pre-emptive transplantation provides with benefits of avoiding dialysis. Surgical and medical considerations in both the pre-transplant and post-transplant management of the pediatric kidney recipient are extremely crucial in order to achieve better short and long-term results.

Saline bladder infusion vs standard catheter removal in patients with acute urinary retention related to benign prostatic hyperplasia: The BLAPERF Study.

PURPOSE: Bladder infusion, which involves filling the bladder with saline prior to catheter removal, has been associated with reduced time-to-discharge and increased success rates in trials without catheter (TWOCs) in perioperative setting. The objective of this study was to evaluate the applicability of this protocol in patients with acute urinary retention (AUR) related to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective single-center study comparing bladder infusion with at least 150mL of warm saline vs. standard catheter removal during TWOC in patients with BPH-related AUR between January and December 2021. The primary outcome was time to discharge. Secondary outcomes included: TWOC success, and early recurrence of urinary retention defined as recurrence within three months of successful TWOC. RESULTS: A total of 75 men were included: 35 in the bladder infusion protocol and 40 in the standard protocol. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between groups. Overall, 35 patients (46.7%) had a successful TWOC without statistically significant difference between groups (P=0.10). Bladder infusion protocol was associated with a shorter median time to discharge (200 vs. 240min, P=0.003). However, patients in the bladder infusion group were associated with a higher risk of early recurrence of urinary retention (30% vs. 0%, P=0.02). CONCLUSION: In patients with BPH-related AUR, the saline bladder infusion method reduced time-to-discharge with similar TWOC success rates. Larger studies are needed to properly analyze the risk of early recurrence of urinary retention before any clinical application. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

[Evaluation of the results and feasibility of vibration, diuresis and inversion therapy in the treatment of upper urinary tract stones]. / Évaluation des résultats et de la faisabilité de la posturothérapie (hydratation, inversion, vibration) dans le traitement des calculs des voies urinaires supérieures.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the feasibility, efficiency, and predictive factors of therapeutic success of Vibration, Diuresis and Inversion (VDI) therapy for the removal of upper urinary tract stones. METHODS: It is a retrospective, single-center study at the CHU - La Conception, Marseille, France including all patients treated with VDI from 2013 to 2018. VDI was indicated for stones <6mm in first-line treatment or for residual fragments <6mm after ureteroscopy, PCNL, microPCNL. The protocol included 4 sessions in outpatient care from 2013 to 2015 then 6 sessions from 2015 to 2018 and a final radiological evaluation. RESULTS: In total, 109 patients or 489 sessions are reported: median age was 55 years [14-84], median BMI 25kg/m2 [15-37], average cumulative size of kidney stones 3mm ±4. VDI was performed after flexible ureteroscopy (62%), SWL (20%), percutaneous treatment (9%) or as a first-line treatment (9%). Compliance was 87 %. The median VAS during the session was 0[0-8]. The incidence of post-session renal colic was 4% (all Clavien I). The postoperative fragment-free and microfragment rates were respectively 39% and 21%, i.e. an overall success of 60% for kidney stones, and 43% and 21%, i.e. an overall success of 64% for lower pole kidney stones. CONCLUSION: VDI is a simple, non invasive and well tolerated technique for the elimination of small renal lithiasis after SWL, ureteroscopy, PCNL or as a first-line treatment.

Comparison of open and robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy approaches using multicentric data (UroCCR-47 study).

We compared the outcomes of robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) and open partial nephrectomy (OPN) using contemporary data to respond to unmet clinical needs. Data from patients included in the registry who underwent partial nephrectomy between January 01, 2014 and June 30, 2017 within 20 centres of the French Network for Research on Kidney Cancer UroCCR were collected (NCT03293563). Statistical methods included adjusted multivariable analyses. Rates of peri- and post-operative transfusion, and of surgical revision, were lower in the RPN (n = 1434) than the OPN (n = 571) group (2.9% vs. 6.0%, p = 0.0012; 3.8% vs. 11.5%, p < 0.0001; 2.4% vs. 6.7%, p < 0.0001, respectively). In multivariable analyses, RPN was independently associated with fewer early post-operative complications than OPN (overall: odds-ratio [95% confidence interval, CI] = 0.48 [0.35-0.66]; severe: 0.29 [0.16-0.54], p < 0.0001 for both) and shorter hospital stays (34% [30%; 37%], p < 0.0001). RPN was also a significantly associated with a decresedrisk of post-operative acute renal failure, and new-onset chronic kidney disease at 3 and 12 months post-surgery. There were no between-group differences in oncological outcomes. In comparison with OPN, RPN was associated with improved peri- and post-operative morbidity, better functional outcomes, and shorter hospital stays. Our results support the use of RPN, even for large and complex tumours.

French AFU Cancer Committee Guidelines - Update 2022-2024: management of kidney cancer.

AIM: To update the recommendations for the management of kidney cancers. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted from 2015 to 2022. The most relevant articles on the diagnosis, classification, surgical treatment, medical treatment and follow-up of kidney cancer were selected and incorporated into the recommendations. Therefore, the recommendations were updated while specifying the level of evidence (high or low). RESULTS: The gold standard for the diagnosis and evaluation of kidney cancer is contrast-enhanced chest and abdominal CT. MRI and contrast-enhanced ultrasound are indicated in special cases. Percutaneous biopsy is recommended in situations where the results will influence the therapeutic decision. Renal tumours should be classified according to the pTNM 2017 classification, the WHO 2022 classification and the ISUP nucleolar grade. Metastatic kidney cancer should be classified according to the IMDC criteria. Partial nephrectomy is the gold standard treatment for T1a tumours and can be performed by an open approach, by laparoscopy or by robot-guidance. Active surveillance of tumours less than 2cm in size can be considered regardless of the patient's age. Ablative therapies and active surveillance are options in elderly patients with comorbidity. T1b tumours should be treated by partial or radical nephrectomy depending on the complexity of the tumour. Radical nephrectomy is the first-line treatment for locally advanced cancers. Adjuvant treatment with pembrolizumab should be considered in patients at intermediate and high risk for recurrence after nephrectomy. In metastatic patients: Immediate cytoreductive nephrectomy may be offered to oligometastatic patients in combination with local treatment of metastases if this can be complete and delayed cytoreductive nephrectomy can be proposed for patients with a complete response or a significant partial response. Medical treatment should be proposed as first-line therapy for patients with a poor or intermediate prognosis. Surgical or local treatment of metastases can be proposed in case of single or oligo-metastases. The recommended first-line drugs for metastatic patients with clear cell renal carcinoma are the combinations axitinib/pembrolizumab, nivolumab/ipililumab, nivolumab/cabozantinib and lenvatinib/pembrolizumab. Cabozantinib is the recommended first-line treatment for patients with metastatic papillary carcinoma. Cystic tumours should be classified according to the Bosniak classification. Surgical removal should be proposed as a priority for Bosniak III and IV lesions. It is recommended that patient monitoring be adapted to the aggressiveness of the tumour. CONCLUSION: These updated recommendations are a reference that will allow French and French-speaking practitioners to improve kidney cancer management.

A multi-institutional experience of Micro-percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (MicroPERC) for renal stones: Results and feasibility of day case surgery.

PURPOSE: To report the multi-institutional outcomes of Microperc for nephrolithiasis and to assess its feasibility in outpatient care. METHODS: We retrospectively identified all adult patients who underwent Microperc for renal stones at three centres between May 2015 and March 2021. Interventions were performed by three Surgeons. One Surgeon adopted a "one-way" strategy and all Microperc were performed on an outpatient basis, while the other two Surgeons provided inpatient monitoring for at least one day after surgery. The primary endpoint was same-day discharge after Microperc without emergency department visits or unplanned readmission within 30 days of the procedure. The secondary endpoints included treatment outcomes and the 30-day complication rate. RESULTS: Out of 72 consecutive patients included, 32 patients (44.4%) had same-day discharge. Median Charlson score (1 [0-2]) and cumulative stone size (15 [12-20] mm) were comparable between both groups. At one month post procedure, 32 patients (44.4%) were stone free and 23 patients (32%) had residual micro-fragments<3mm, conferring an overall success rate of 76.4% (inpatient Microperc group: 77.5% vs outpatient Microperc group: 75%, P=1). Analysis of the 30-day complication rate showed similar results between the two groups (Clavien I-II: 18.1%, Clavien≥III: 4.1%). After outpatient care, the rate of immediate admission and unplanned readmission was 12.5% (n=4), mainly due to urinary tract infection. CONCLUSION: In this multi-institutional study, we report that outpatient Microperc is feasible in selected patients with no significant impact on postoperative outcome.

Comparison of water vapor thermal therapy and prostate artery embolization for fragile patients with indwelling urinary catheters: Preliminary results from a multi-institutional study.

PURPOSE: To report our preliminary experience with water vapor thermal therapy with the Rezum™ System and Prostate Artery Embolization (PAE) for treatment of medically refractory, complete urinary retention to achieve successful cessation of catheter dependency in frail-patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multi-institutional study was conducted including all patients who underwent Rezum™ procedure and PAE between October 2017 and June 2020. The included population focused on frail-patients unsuitable for conventional surgery with complete urinary retention. Rezum™ patients were identified and matched (1:1) with patients who underwent PAE. The matching criteria were age, Charlson score, prostate volume and duration of follow-up. The primary outcome was catheter-free survival, defined as spontaneous voiding and release from catheter dependence. RESULTS: Eleven patients from the Rezum™ group were matched to 11 embolized patients. PAE and Rezum™ patients were comparable in age (median: 77 vs. 75 years), Charlson score (median: 6 vs. 6) and prostate volume (74 vs. 60 cc). Procedures were significantly longer in the PAE group compared to the Rezum™ procedures (median: 148 vs. 8min, P<0.001). After a median follow-up of 12 months, spontaneous voiding was conserved in all cases (100%) after the Rezum™ procedure and in 5 cases (45.4%) after PAE (P=0.01). In catheter-free patients, the rate of benign prostatic hyperplasia medication use after procedure was 40% for PAE and 18.2% for Rezum™ patients (P=0.54). CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary experience for treatment of complete urinary retention in frail-patients shows the feasibility of PAE and Rezum™ to restore spontaneous urination without being associated with the occurrence of major complications. Early data suggests that Rezum™ may provide superior results in terms of cessation of catheter dependence. Future studies are needed to definitively assess which treatment would be best suited for each patient. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.