Open versus Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy for the Treatment of pT4a Bladder Cancer: Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes.

We compared the perioperative outcomes of open (ORC) vs. robot-assisted (RARC) radical cystectomy in the treatment of pT4a MIBC. In total, 212 patients underwent ORC (102 patients, Group A) vs. RARC (110 patients, Group B) for pT4a bladder cancer. Patients were prospectively followed and retrospectively reviewed. We assessed operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), intraoperative and postoperative complications, length of stay, transfusion rate, and oncological outcomes. Preoperative features were comparable. The mean operative time was 232.8 vs. 189.2 min (p = 0.04), and mean EBL was 832.8 vs. 523.7 mL in Group A vs. B (p = 0.04). An intraoperative transfusion was performed in 32 (31.4%) vs. 11 (10.0%) cases during ORC vs. RARC (p = 0.03). The intraoperative complications rate was comparable. The mean length of stay was shorter after RARC (12.6 vs. 7.2 days, p = 0.02). Postoperative transfusions were performed in 36 (35.3%) vs. 13 (11.8%) cases (p = 0.03), and postoperative complications occurred in 37 (36.3%) vs. 29 (26.4%) patients in Groups A vs. B (p = 0.05). The positive surgical margin (PSM) rate was lower after RARC. No differences were recorded according to the oncological outcomes. ORC and RARC are feasible treatments for the management of pT4a bladder tumors. Minimally invasive surgery provides shorter operative time, bleeding, transfusion rate, postoperative complications, length of stay, and PSM rate.

Pathological report and prognostic meaning of Bosniak IV cysts: results from a contemporary cohort.

Introduction: Surgery is the recommended treatment for Bosniak IV renal cysts. We performed a retrospective analysis of Bosniak IV lesions surgically removed to increase evidence on their prognostic meaning. Material and methods: Patients with a Bosniak IV cyst were considered. A contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) scan or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) detected a solid component with contrast enhancement. In no case a percutaneous biopsy was performed. A radical (9, 21.4%) or partial (33, 78.6%) nephrectomy was performed with laparoscopic (14, 33.3%) or robot-assisted (28, 66.7%) approach. Analysis of the final pathology was performed, and recurrence rate was assessed. Results: 42 patients were included. Median lesion size was 54.7 mm (IQR 20.0-81.2). A solid tumour was detected in 40 patients (95.2%), whereas in 2 cases (4.8%) a benign cyst without neoplastic component was diagnosed. Final pathology revealed a low-grade clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) in 16 cases (38.0%), a multilocular cystic renal neoplasm of low malignant potential in 6 cases (14.3%), a low-grade papillary RCC (pRCC) type I in 4 cases (9.5%), a clear cell papillary RCC (ccpRCC) in 10 cases (23.8%) and an oncocytoma in 2 cases (4.8%). A high-grade ccRCC was detected in 2 cases (4.8%), whereas no patients had a pRCC type II. In all cases surgical margins were negative. Median follow-up was 24 months and no recurrence occurred. Conclusions: Our results increase evidence on the favourable pathology and good prognosis of Bosniak IV renal cysts, supporting the role of surgery as a definitive treatment and suggesting the need for a low-intensity follow-up.

Thulium: YAG vs continuous-wave thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate: do potential advantages of thulium fiber lasers translate into relevant clinical differences?

PURPOSE: To compare endoscopic enucleation of the prostate using a thulium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Tm:YAG) laser and a super-pulsed thulium fiber laser set in continuous-wave (CW) mode, and to evaluate whether theoretical advantages of thulium fiber lasers, related to their shorter wavelength, translate into relevant clinical differences. METHODS: In total, 110 patients suffering from lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia were randomized to undergo either thulium:YAG laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) or CW thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (CW-ThuFLEP). Intraoperative and postoperative variables and complications were compared. Micturition improvement was assessed at 3-month follow-up using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), post-void residual urine (PVR) and maximum flow rate (Qmax). Erectile function was evaluated using the International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5). RESULTS: No significant differences between the ThuLEP and CW-ThuFLEP groups were found in terms of operative time (70.69 vs 72.41 min), enucleation time (50.23 vs 53.33 min), enucleated tissue weight (40.2 vs 41.9 g), enucleation efficiency (0.80 vs 0.79 g/min), catheterization time (2.45 vs 2.57 days), hospital stay (2.82 vs 2.95 days) and hemoglobin drop (1.05 vs 1.27 g/dl). At 3-month follow-up, no significant differences were found in IPSS (5.09 vs 5.81), Qmax (26.51 vs 27.13 ml/s), PVR (25.22 vs 23.81 ml) and IIEF-5 (14.01 vs 14.54). CONCLUSION: ThuLEP and CW-ThuFLEP were equivalent in relieving patients from LUTS and improving micturition. Theoretical advantages of the TFL, such as shallower penetration depth and improved vaporization capacity, did not translate into relevant perioperative outcomes or clinical differences.

"VirtualBasket" ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy: intraoperative and early postoperative outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The "VirtualBasket" technology (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA) is the result of pulse modulation during holmium laser emission: the laser emits part of the energy to create an initial bubble, and a second pulse is emitted when the vapor bubble is at its maximum expansion, so that it can pass through the previously created vapor channel. The aim of this study was to outline the outcomes of the "VirtualBasket" technology in ureteral and renal stones. METHODS: 160 Patients were randomly assigned to holmium laser lithotripsy with or without the "VirtualBasket" technology in ureteric or renal cases (40 per 4 groups). All procedures were performed by four experienced urologists. The Quanta System Cyber Ho 100W laser generator with 365 µm fibers was used for all the ureteral cases, whereas 272 µm fibers were used for all the cases in the renal pelvis. Demographic data, stone parameters, perioperative complications and success rates were compared. A statistical analysis was carried out to assess patients' data and outcomes. All the reported P values were obtained with the two-sided exact method at the conventional 5% significance level. The degree of stone retropulsion was graded on a Likert scale from zero (no retropulsion) to 3 (maximum retropulsion). RESULTS: All groups were comparable in terms of age, and preoperative stone size (ureter stone size: 1.2 vs. 1.1 cm; renal pelvis stone size: 1.55 vs. 1.62 cm). Compared to the regular mode, the "VirtualBasket" technology was associated with significantly lower fragmentation time (mean time for ureteral stones: 20.4 vs. 16.1 minutes, P<0.05; mean time for renal stones: 28.7 vs. 19.8 minutes, P<0.05) and total procedural time (mean time for ureteral stones 49 vs. 35.7 minutes; mean time for renal stones 67.1 vs. 52.4 minutes). There were no significant differences in terms of energy delivered to the stones, intraoperative complications and success rate at 1 month. The "VirtualBasket" technology was associated with significantly lower retropulsion. CONCLUSIONS: The "VirtualBasket" technology is associated with significantly lower fragmentation and procedural times. The reduced fragmentation time is a result of the significantly lower retropulsion of the stones during laser lithotripsy, which improves stone fragmentation efficiency.

Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate with Virtual Basket mode: faster and better control on bleeding.

BACKGROUND: To compare clinical intra and early postoperative outcomes between conventional Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate using the Virtual Basket tool (VB-HoLEP) to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: This prospective randomized study enrolled consecutive patients with BPH, who were assigned to undergo either HoLEP (n = 100), or VB-HoLEP (n = 100). All patients were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively, with particular attention to catheterization time, operative time, blood loss, irrigation volume and hospital stay. We also evaluated the patients at 3 and 6 months after surgery and assessed maximum flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual urine volume (PVR), the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and the Quality of Life score (QOLS). RESULTS: No significant differences in preoperative parameters between patients in each study arm were found. Compared to HoLEP, VB-HoLEP resulted in less hemoglobin decrease (2.54 vs. 1.12 g/dl, P = 0.03) and reduced operative time (57.33 ± 29.71 vs. 42.99 ± 18.51 min, P = 0.04). HoLEP and VB-HoLEP detrmined similar catheterization time (2.2 vs. 1.9 days, P = 0.45), irrigation volume (33.3 vs. 31.7 l, P = 0.69), and hospital stay (2.8 vs. 2.7 days, P = 0.21). During the 6-month follow-up no significant differences in IPSS, Qmax, PVR, and QOLS were demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: HoLEP and VB-HoLEP are both efficient and safe procedures for relieving lower urinary tract symptoms. VB-HoLEP was statistically superior to HoLEP in blood loss and operative time. However, procedures did not differ significantly in catheterization time, hospital stay, and irrigation volume. No significant differences were demonstrated in QOLS, IPSS, Qmax and PVR throughout the 6-month follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN72879639; date of registration: June 25th, 2015. Retrospectively registred.

Disposable versus Reusable Ureteroscopes: A Prospective Multicenter Randomized Comparison.

PURPOSE: To compare reusable and disposable flexible ureteroscopes in terms of efficacy and safety for patients undergoing Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery (RIRS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with a renal stone eligible for RIRS were enrolled in this multicenter, randomized, clinical trial study. Patients were randomized into two groups: group A (90 patients) underwent RIRS with a reusable flexible ureteroscope and group B (90 patients) were treated with a disposable one. RESULTS: The patients' demographics, stone features and pre-operative urine cultures were comparable between the groups. The Stone Free Rates (SFRs) were not significantly different (86.6% and 90.0% for group A and group B, respectively, p=0.11) and the mean cost for each procedure was comparable (2321 € in group A vs 2543 € in group B, p=0.09). However, the days of hospitalization and of antibiotic therapy were higher in group A (p ≤ 0.05). The overall complication rate in group A was 8.8% whilst in group B it was 3.3% (p ≤ 0.05); in particular, group A exhibited a greater number of major complications (Clavien score IIIa-V). The overall postoperative infection rate was 16.6% in group A and 3.3% in group B (p ≤ 0.05). Furthermore, none of the patients in group B developed urosepsis or had a positive blood culture, while 3 patients in group A did (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: The use of disposable ureteroscopes is characterized by significantly lower post-operative complications and infection rates, while having comparable costs and SFRs vis à vis reusable ureteroscopes. Clinical Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN92289221.

Thulium-laser retrograde intra renal ablation of upper urinary tract transitional cell carcinoma: an ESUT Study.

BACKGROUND: Radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) is the gold standard treatment for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC); however, patients presenting with small low-grade UTUC have been treated by flexible ureteroscopic laser ablation with good outcomes. Different types of laser have been discussed in the literature including Holmium and Neodymium lasers. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of Thulium laser (Tm:YAG) in the ureteroscopic ablation of UTUC. METHODS: A retrospective observational multicentre study of patients diagnosed with papillary UTUC between January 2015 and December 2016 was carried out. All patients underwent ureteroscopic biopsy of the UTUC followed by Tm:YAG ablation. Based on the histopathological grade of the tumor, patients were counseled to undergo either RNU (high- grade tumors) or conservative management and follow-up (low-grade tumor). RESULTS: RNU was performed in 31 patients, while the remaining 47 patients (undergone Tm:YAG ablation only) were followed up for a mean of 11.7 months with only 19.2% of patients showing upper tract recurrence and no patients showed postoperative ureteral strictures. Limitations include the short follow-up and retrospective nature of the study. CONCLUSIONS: On the short term, thulium Laser ablation of UTUC is safe and feasible especially in low-grade UTUC.

Ejaculation-sparing thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ES-ThuLEP): outcomes on a large cohort.

PURPOSE: To assess the effects of a new ejaculation-sparing thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ES-ThuLEP) technique on sexual functions and micturition, in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and to evaluate how the surgical technique of ES-ThuLEP can lead to ejaculation preservation. METHODS: A prospective study was carried out between January 2015 and January 2018 on patients with surgical indication for BPH, who wished to preserve ejaculation. The patients were treated with ES-ThuLEP and were evaluated before and 3 and 6 months after surgery. Three validated questionnaires (ICIQ-MLUTSsex, IIEF-5 and IPSS) were used to assess changes in ejaculation, erectile function and urinary symptoms. Uroflowmetry (Qmax and Qavg), post-void residual volume and voided volume were also evaluated, to assess micturition improvement. Patients with moderate to severe erectile dysfunction were excluded. Statistical analysis was performed with the Student's t test, Chi-square test and logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Two hundred and eighty three patients were enrolled. Ejaculation was spared in 203 and 219 patients at 3 and 6 months after surgery. No significant differences were observed between erectile function before and after surgery: baseline IIEF-5 = 16.2 ± 4.47 vs 16.7 ± 2.9 (p = 0.419) and 17.7 ± 3.2 (p = 0.410) at 3 and 6 months. Significant improvement in urinary symptoms was achieved: baseline IPSS = 19.4 ± 7.24 vs 5.8 ± 4.3 (p = 0.032) and 3.9 ± 4.1 (p = 0.029) at 3 and 6 months. CONCLUSION: ES-ThuLEP effectively preserved ejaculation in over two thirds of the patients without compromising micturition improvement or erectile function. ES-ThuLEP could be a valid treatment option for BPH in young and sexually active men.

Current evidence of ThuLEP for BPH: A review of literature.

Endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) techniques for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) have become increasingly popular among urologists over the past 23 years. Despite the energy source employed, the aim of all these procedures is to endoscopically remove the prostatic lobes by enucleating them from the prostate surgical capsule. The reasons for which EEP has gained popularity among urologists are the reduction in complications and hospital stay compared to endoscopic gold standard Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP), but especially the possibility to treat large prostates, allowing to abandon open simple prostatectomy (OP) and to avoid the burden related to open surgery. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) sets the basic principles of all EEP techniques in 1998 and has become the treatment of reference for BPH. Since then, various lasers have been developed and applied to prostatic enucleation. The thulium laser has a slightly shorter wavelength compared to the holmium laser and a continuous wave output, which increase vaporization and reduce penetration depth. These features make it ideal for prostatic enucleation. A vapoenucleating technique called Thulium Laser Vapoenucleation of the Prostate was presented in 2009, followed by a blunt enucleating technique called Thulium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate in 2010. These techniques have become alternatives to HoLEP and TURP; however, the amount of literature and randomized controlled trials available are inferior compared to HoLEP. The aim of th describe, and discuss current evidence on thulium enucleating techniques.

A prospective multicenter randomized comparison between Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP) and Thulium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (ThuLEP).

PURPOSE: To compare intra and perioperative parameters between HoLEP and ThuLEP in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia and to evaluate clinical and functional outcomes of the two procedures with a 12-month follow-up. METHODS: A prospective randomized study was performed on 236 consecutive patients who underwent ThuLEP (n = 115), or HoLEP (n = 121) in three different centers. Intra and perioperative parameters were analyzed: operative time, enucleated tissue weight, irrigation volume, blood loss, catheterization time, hospital stay and complications. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and 3 and 12 months postoperatively with the international prostate symptom score (IPSS), the quality of life (QoL) score, post-void residual volume (PVR), PSA and maximum flow rate (Qmax). RESULTS: Preoperative variables in each study arm did not show any significant difference. Compared to HoLEP, ThuLEP showed similar operative time (63.69 vs 71.66 min, p = 0.245), enucleated tissue weight (48.84 vs 51.13 g, p = 0.321), catheterization time (1.9 vs 2.0 days, p = 0.450) and hospital stay (2.2 vs 2.8 days, p = 0.216), but resulted in less haemoglobin decrease (0.45 vs 2.77 g/dL, p = 0.005). HoLEP presented a significantly higher number of patients with postoperative acute urinary retention and stress incontinence. No significant differences were found in PSA, Qmax, PVR, IPSS and QoL score during follow-up. CONCLUSION: ThuLEP and HoLEP both relieved lower urinary tract symptoms equally, with high efficacy and safety. ThuLEP detemined reduced blood loss and early postoperative complications. Catheterization time, enucleated tissue, hospital stay, operative time and follow-up parameters did not show any significant difference.

A comparison among PCNL, Miniperc and Ultraminiperc for lower calyceal stones between 1 and 2 cm: a prospective, comparative, multicenter and randomised study.

BACKGROUND: Conventional Percutaneous Lithotripsy (PCNL) has been an effective, successful and easy approach for especially > 1 cm sized calyceal stones however risks of complications and nephron loss are inevitable. Our aim is to compare the efficacy and safety of PCNL, MiniPerc (MP) and UltraMiniPerc (UMP) for lower calyceal stones between 1 and 2 cm with a multicenter prospective randomized study. METHODS: Between January 2015 and June 2018, 132 consecutive patients with single lower calyceal stone were enrolled. Patients were randomized in three groups; A: PCNL; B: MP; C: UMP. 44 patients for the Group A, 47 for Group B and 41 for Group C. Exclusion criterias were the presence of coagulation impairments, age of < 18 or > 75, presence of infection or serious comorbidities. Patients were controlled with computerized tomography scan after 3 months. A negative CT or an asymptomatic patient with stone fragments < 3 mm size were the criteria to assess the stone-free status. Patient characteristics, stone free rates (SFR) s, complications and re-treatment rates were analyzed. RESULTS: The mean stone size were 16.38, 16.82 and 15.23 mm respectively in Group A, B and C(p = 0.34). The overall SFR was significantly higher in Group A (86.3%) and B (82.9%) as compared to Group C (78%)(p < 0.05). The re-treatment rate was significantly higher in Group C (12.1%) and complication rates was higher in Group A (13.6%) as compared to others(p < 0.05). The hospitalization was significantly shorter in Group C compared to Group A (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: PCNL and MP showed higher efficacy than UMP to obtain a better SFR. Auxiliary and re-treatment rates were higher in UMP. On the other hand for such this kind of stones PCNL had more complications. Overall evaluation favors MP as a better indication in stones 1-2 cm size.

Is there a clinical role for frozen section analysis during partial nephrectomy? A multicenter experience over 10 years.

BACKGROUND: Frozen section analysis (FSA) is frequently performed during partial nephrectomy (PN). We investigate the utility of intraoperative FSA by evaluating its impact on final surgical margin (SM) status. METHODS: Between January 1995 and December 2005, a series of patients who were treated with open PN for renal cell carcinoma was prospectively analyzed. During PN, each patient underwent a FSA on renal parenchyma distal margin. If FSA was positive for infiltration a deeper excision was performed till obtaining a negative FSA. SM outcome of the FSA was compared with the final pathology report. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and cost analysis on the FSA performed were analyzed. RESULTS: A total number of 373 patients were enrolled. FSA was performed in all the patients considered for PN. Fifteen patients had a conversion to radical nephrectomy. Positive SMs at the definitive pathological outcome were found in 36 patients (9.6%). FSA was positive in eight patients (2.1%). In that eight cases after a deeper excision the definitive pathological outcome on SM was still positive in two cases. FSA revealed just 14.3% of the positive SM. Patients with positive SM had a worse follow up considering RFS (P<0.05). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that FSA did not considerably contribute to prevent recurrence (P=0.35). 1438 euros was the mean cost of performing a FSA during PN. CONCLUSIONS: FSA during PN does not reduce the risk of positive SMs. The use of FSA has also a higher cost related to the procedure.

Peri-Operative Outcomes after Open and Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy by Using an Advanced Bipolar Seal and Cut Technology (Caiman®): A Prospective, Comparative, and Multi-Institutional Study.

OBJECTIVE: To report and compare the peri-operative outcomes of patients undergoing open (ORC) and robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) for bladder cancer performed with a radiofrequency seal and cut device (Caiman®). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data of patients undergoing ORC or RARC between January 2015 and March 2016 at 6 Italian institutions were prospectively recorded and analyzed. Thirty-and 90-day complications were stratified according to the Martin's criteria and graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Data on operative time, blood loss, transfusion rate, complications, and length of stay were evaluated and compared between the ORC and RARC groups. RESULTS: Thirty-three (66%) and 17 (34%) patients were treated with ORC and RARC, respectively. The median age was 72 (64-78) years. Overall operative time was longer in RARC compared to ORC (389 ± 80.1 vs. 242 ± 62.2 min, p < 0.001), while the estimated blood loss during cystectomy was higher after ORC (370 ± 126.8 vs. 243.3 ± 201.6 ml, p = 0.03). The transfusion rate was significantly higher in the ORC compared to RARC (24.2 vs. 5.9%, p = 0.04). Eight (19%) and 7 (16.7%) patients experienced 30- and 90-day post-operative complications, with no significant difference between ORC and RARC. Length of stay was significantly shorter in RARC group (median 7 vs. 14 days, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Open and robot-assisted procedures were safely performed by using a new advanced bipolar seal and cut technology (Caiman®). RARC demonstrated to be superior to ORC in terms of bleeding, transfusion rates and length of hospital stay, despite longer operative time.