Corrigendum to "RPN (Radius, Position of tumour, iNvasion of renal sinus) Classification and Nephrometry Scoring System: An Internationally Developed Clinical Classification To Describe the Surgical Difficulty for Renal Masses for Which Robotic Partial Nephrectomy Is Planned" [Eur. Urol. Open Sci. 54 (2023) 33-42].

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.05.007.].

The prostatic middle lobe: clinical significance, presentation and management.

The role of the prostatic middle lobe in the presentation and management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is under-appreciated. Middle lobe enlargement is associated with intravesical prostatic protrusion (IPP), which causes a unique type of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) via a 'ball-valve' mechanism. IPP is a reliable predictor of BOO and the strongest independent factor for failure of medical therapy necessitating conversion to surgical intervention. Men with middle lobe enlargement tend to exhibit mixed symptoms of both the storage and the voiding types, but symptomatology will vary depending on the degree of IPP present. Initial assessments such as uroflowmetry and post-void residual volumes are inadequate to detect IPP and could confound the clinical picture. Radiological evaluation of prostate morphology is key to assessment as it provides important prognostic information and can help with operative planning. Treatment strategies employed for BPH should consider the shape and morphology of prostate adenomata, specifically the presence of middle lobe enlargement and the degree of associated IPP.

Resection Techniques During Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review.

Context: The resection technique used to excise tumor during robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) is of paramount importance in achieving optimal clinical outcomes. Objective: To provide an overview of the different resection techniques used during RPN, and a pooled analysis of comparative studies. Evidence acquisition: The systematic review was conducted according to established principles (PROSPERO: CRD42022371640) on November 7, 2022. A population (P: adult patients undergoing RPN), intervention (I: enucleation), comparator (C: enucleoresection or wedge resection), outcome (O: outcome measurements of interest), and study design (S) framework was prespecified to assess study eligibility. Studies reporting a detailed description of resection techniques and/or evaluating the impact of resection technique on outcomes of surgery were included. Evidence synthesis: Resection techniques used during RPN can be broadly classified as resection (non-anatomic) or enucleation (anatomic). A standardized definition for these is lacking. Out of 20 studies retrieved, nine compared "standard" resection versus enucleation. A pooled analysis did not reveal significant differences in terms of operative time, ischemia time, blood loss, transfusions, or positive margins. Significant differences favoring enucleation were found for clamping management (odds ratio [OR] for renal artery clamping 3.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-10.88; p = 0.03), overall complications (OR for occurrence 0.55, 95% CI 0.34-0.87; p = 0.01) major complications (OR for occurrence 0.39, 95% CI 0.19-0.79; p = 0.009), length of stay (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.72 d, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.45; p < 0.001), and decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate (WMD -2.64 ml/min, 95% CI -5.15 to -0.12; p = 0.04). Conclusions: There is heterogeneity in the reporting of resection techniques used during RPN. The urological community must improve the quality of reporting and research produced accordingly. Positive margins are not specifically related to the resection technique. Focusing on studies comparing standard resection versus enucleation, advantages with tumor enucleation in terms of avoidance of artery clamping, overall/major complications, length of stay, and renal function were found. These data should be considered when planning the RPN resection strategy. Patient summary: We reviewed studies on robotic surgery for partial kidney removal using different techniques to cut away the kidney tumor. We found that a technique called "enucleation" was associated with similar cancer control outcomes in comparison to the standard technique and had fewer complications, better kidney function after surgery, and a shorter hospital stay.

Clinical outcomes of anterior prostate cancers treated with robotic assisted radical prostatectomy.

Introduction: A prospective cohort study comparing peri- and postoperative outcomes for patients with predominantly anterior prostate cancer (APC) identified preoperatively against non-anterior prostate cancer (NAPC) treated via robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Patients and Methods: Of the 757 RARP's completed between January 2016 and April 2018, two comparative cohorts for anterior and an equivalent group of non-anterior prostate tumours each consisting of 152 patients were compared against each other. Data were collected on the following variables: patient age; operating consultant; preoperative PSA, ISUP grade, degree of nerve sparing; tumour staging; presence and location of positive surgical margins; PSA density, postoperative ISUP grade; treatment paradigm and postoperative PSA, erectile function, and continence outcomes with 2-year follow-up. Results: APCs were found to have significantly lower ISUP grading postoperatively; increased diagnosis via active surveillance over new diagnosis; more frequently undertaken bilateral nerve-sparing and long-term poorer continence outcomes at 18 and 24 months postoperatively (p < 0.05). Pre- and post-op PSA levels, erectile function, PSA density, positive surgical margins (PSM), age and tumour staging showed no significant differences between the APC and NAPC cohorts (p > 0.05). Conclusion: The lower ISUP grading could indicate APC as overall being less aggressive than NAPC, whereas the poorer long-term continence outcomes require further investigating. The non-significant differences amongst tumour staging, PSA density, preoperative PSA levels and PSM rates suggest that APC may not be as significant as predicted in diagnostic evaluation. Overall, this study provides useful information on the growing literature of anterior prostate cancer. Being the largest comparative cohort study to date on APC post-RARP, these results indicate the true characteristics of anterior tumours and their functional outcomes to help improve education, patient expectations and management.

Decision Regret in Patients with Localised Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Treatment choice for localised prostate cancer remains a significant challenge for patients and clinicians, with uncertainty over decisions potentially leading to conflict and regret. There is a need to further understand the prevalence and prognostic factors of decision regret to improve patient quality of life. OBJECTIVE: To generate the best estimates for the prevalence of significant decision regret localised prostate cancer patients, and to investigate prognostic patient, oncological, and treatment factors associated with regret. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We performed a systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and PsychINFO databases including studies evaluating the prevalence or patient, treatment, or oncological prognostic factors in localised prostate cancer patients. A pooled prevalence of significant regret was calculated with the formal prognostic factor evaluation conducted per factor identified. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Significant decision regret was present in a pooled 20% (95% confidence interval 16-23) of patients across 14 studies and 17883 patients. This was lower in active surveillance (13%), with little difference between those who underwent radiotherapy (19%) and those who underwent prostatectomy (18%). Evaluation of individual prognostic factors demonstrated higher regret in those with poorer post-treatment bowel, sexual, and urinary function; decreased involvement in the decision-making process; and Black ethnicity. However, evidence remains conflicting, with low or moderate certainty of findings. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of men experience decision regret after a localised prostate cancer diagnosis. Monitoring those with increased functional symptoms and improving patient involvement in the decision-making process through education and decision aids may reduce regret. PATIENT SUMMARY: We looked at how common regret in treatment decisions is after treatment for early-stage prostate cancer and factors linked with this. We found that one in five regret their decision, with those who had experienced side effects or were less involved in the decision-making process more likely to have regret. By addressing these, clinicians could reduce regret and improve quality of life.

Red Out: Bleeding During Robotic Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection and Strategies To Manage It.

Robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection is emerging as an attractive minimally invasive technique to remove residual and recurrent retroperitoneal masses in patients with germ cell malignancies. It has huge potential benefits for patients in terms of lower rates of blood loss, ileus, postoperative pain, and scarring, and faster return to full activity. Inadvertent injury to the great vessels, lumbar tributaries, and other vessels is not uncommon and requires a calm but strategic management response. A thorough knowledge of the standard anatomy, specific pathology, and anatomic variations will help robotic surgeons in managing intraoperative haemorrhage. We describe the anatomy of the retroperitoneal vessels, surgical case selection, and the technical and nontechnical skills essential for success in this complex and high-risk procedure. Patient summary: Robot-assisted surgical removal of lymph nodes from the area behind the abdominal cavity is a complex operation that has minimal bleeding if all goes well. However, as it involves operating on the major abdominal blood vessels, there is a risk of life-threatening bleeding that the operating team must be able to rapidly control. Effective teamwork and a range of advanced technical skills are required to respond to any serious bleeding.

Superior Mesenteric Artery Injury during Robotic Radical Nephrectomy: Scenarios and Management Strategies.

Injury to the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) is a rare, underreported, and potentially devastating complication. This study aims to propose a systematic workup to describe how to prevent and manage SMA injury in a standardized stepwise manner. Three different instances of intraoperative injury to the SMA are described in an accompanying video. All three occurred when the SMA was misidentified as the left renal artery during left robotic radical nephrectomy. In the first case, the SMA was mistakenly identified as the renal artery, but after further dissection, the real renal artery was identified and SMA injury was prevented. In the second case, the SMA was clipped and the real left renal artery was subsequently identified, requiring clip removal. In the third case, the SMA was clipped and completely transected, requiring prompt repair by vascular surgery with a successful outcome. This study aims to propose a systematic workup to describe how to prevent and manage SMA injury in a standardized stepwise manner. The proper anatomic recognition of the SMA may prevent its injury. Intraoperative SMA injury should be promptly identified and repaired to avoid its devastating consequences.

Epidemiology of Renal Cell Carcinoma: 2022 Update.

CONTEXT: International variations in the rates of kidney cancer (KC) are considerable. An understanding of the risk factors for KC development is necessary to generate opportunities to reduce its incidence through prevention and surveillance. OBJECTIVE: To retrieve and summarize global incidence and mortality rates of KC and risk factors associated with its development, and to describe known familial syndromes and genetic alterations that represent biologic risk factors. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review was conducted via Medline (PubMed) and Scopus to include meta-analyses, reviews, and original studies regarding renal cell carcinoma, epidemiology, and risk factors. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Our narrative review provides a detailed analysis of KC incidence and mortality, with significant variations across time, geography, and sex. In particular, while KC incidence has continued to increase, mortality models have leveled off. Among the many risk factors, hypertension, obesity, and smoking are the most well established. The emergence of new genetic data coupled with observational data allows for integrated management and surveillance strategies for KC care. CONCLUSIONS: KC incidence and mortality rates vary significantly by geography, sex, and age. Associations of the development of KC with modifiable and fixed risk factors such as obesity, hypertension, smoking, and chronic kidney disease (CKD)/end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) are well described. Recent advances in the genetic characterization of these cancers have led to a better understanding of the germline and somatic mutations that predispose patients to KC development, with potential for identification of therapeutic targets that may improve outcomes for these at-risk patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed evidence on the occurrence of kidney cancer (KC) around the world. Currently, the main avoidable causes are smoking, obesity, and high blood pressure. Although other risk factors also contribute, prevention and treatment of these three factors provide the best opportunities to reduce the risk of developing KC at present.

Metastasectomy in renal cell carcinoma: where are we now?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Metastatic RCC has a variable natural history. Treatment choice depends on disease and patient factors, but most importantly disease burden and site of metastasis. This article highlights key variables to consider when contemplating metastasectomy for RCC and provide a narrative review on the evidence for metastasectomy in these patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Tumour subtype is associated with differing patterns of recurrence. Patients with single or few metastatic sites have better outcomes, and those with greater time interval from initial nephrectomy. Local recurrence is particularly amenable to minimally invasive surgical resection and is oncologically sound. Very well selected cases of liver or brain metastases may benefit from metastectomy, although lung and endocrine metastases have more favourable outcomes. Although site and burden of disease is important, the key determinate of outcome in metastasectomy depends mostly on the ability to achieve a complete resection. Adjuvant treatment is not currently advocated. SUMMARY: Metastasectomy should be generally reserved for cases where complete resection is achievable, unless the goal of treatment is to palliate symptoms. This field warrants ongoing research, particularly as systemic therapy and minimally invasive surgical techniques evolve. Elucidating tumour biology to inform patient selection will be important in future research.

Radical cancer treatment is safe during COVID-19: the real-world experience of a large London-based Comprehensive Cancer Centre during the first wave.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID pandemic, there was a paucity of data to support clinical decision-making for anticancer treatments. We evaluated the safety of radical treatments which were delivered whilst mitigating the risks of concurrent COVID-19 infection. METHODS: Using descriptive statistics, we report on the characteristics and short-term clinical outcomes of patients undergoing radical cancer treatment during the first COVID-19 wave compared to a similar pre-pandemic period. RESULTS: Compared to 2019, the number of patients undergoing radical treatment in 2020 reduced by: 28% for surgery; 18% for SACT; and 10% for RT. Within SACT, 36% received combination therapy, 35% systemic chemotherapy, 23% targeted treatments, 5% immunotherapy and 2% biological therapy. A similar proportion of RT was delivered in 2019 and 2020 (53% vs. 52%). Oncological outcomes were also similar to pre-COVID-19. The COVID-19 infection rates were low: 12 patients were positive pre surgery (1%), 7 post surgery (<1%), 17 SACT patients (2%) and 3 RT patients (<1%). No COVID-19-related deaths were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst there were fewer patients receiving radical anticancer treatments, those who did receive treatment were treated in a safe environment. Overall, cancer patients should have the confidence to attend hospitals and be reassured of the safety measures implemented.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on urological cancers: The surgical experience of two cancer hubs in London and Milan.

Objective: To report on the outcomes of urological cancer patients undergoing radical surgery between March-September 2020 (compared with 2019) in the European Institute of Oncology (IEO) in Milan and the South East London Cancer Alliance (SELCA). Materials and Methods: Since March 2020, both institutions implemented a COVID-19 minimal 'green' pathway, whereby patients were required to isolate for 14 days prior to admission and report a negative COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test within 3 days of surgery. COVID-19 positive patients had surgery deferred until a negative swab. Surgical outcomes assessed were: American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade; surgery time; theatre time; intensive care unit (ICU) stay >24 h; pneumonia; length of stay (LOS); re-admission. Postoperative COVID-19 infection rates and associated mortality were also recorded. Results: At IEO, uro-oncological surgery increased by 4%, as compared with the same period in 2019 (n = 515 vs. 534). The main increase was observed for renal (16%, n = 98 vs. 114), bladder (24%, n = 45 vs. 56) and testicular (27%, n = 26 vs. 33). Patient demographics were all comparable between 2019 and 2020. Only one bladder cancer patient developed COVID-19, reporting mild/moderate disease. There was no COVID-19 associated mortality. In the SELCA cohort, uro-oncological surgery declined by 23% (n = 403 vs. 312) compared with the previous year. The biggest decrease was seen for prostate (-42%, n = 156 vs. 91), penile (-100%, n = 4 vs. 0) and testicular cancers (-46%, n = 35 vs. 24). Various patient demographic characteristics were notably different when comparing 2020 versus 2019. This likely reflects the clinical decision of deferring COVID-19 vulnerable patients. One patient developed COVID-19, with no COVID-19 related mortality. Conclusion: The COVID-19 minimal 'green' pathways that were put in place have shown to be safe for uro-oncological patients requiring radical surgery. There were limited complications, almost no peri-operative COVID-19 infection and no COVID-19-related mortality in either cohort.

Superior Mesenteric Artery Injury During Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Nephrectomy: A Robotic Nightmare.

Major vascular injuries during robotic renal surgery are rare, but the close proximity of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) to the left renal artery means that it is liable to iatrogenic injury with potentially catastrophic implications. In this review, we present a case of accidental SMA ligation during a robot-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy for a 12-cm upper pole renal mass. Prompt recognition and early vascular surgical assistance with conversion to open surgery allowed a primary vascular anastomosis to be made. A computed tomography angiogram at 6 wk was normal. On review of the imaging, the left renal artery take-off was higher than the SMA, which represents an anatomical variant and may have contributed to the injury. The risk of accidental SMA ligation is highest in left-sided tumours and in larger medial tumours that lead to significant distortion of the anatomy. The anatomy of the renal artery can also vary greatly. Surgeons must be knowledgeable of common variations and meticulously review preoperative imaging for the number and course of renal vessels as well as the location of the SMA. In cases of significant bleeding, rapid conversion to open surgery and urgent vascular consultation are critical. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this article, we describe an accidental injury to a major blood vessel (the superior mesenteric artery) during a left robotic radical nephrectomy (kidney removal) for a tumour. We discuss the anatomical relationships of the blood vessels of the small bowel and kidneys, and how to anticipate, recognise, and manage such accidental injuries.

HoLEPs: A Comparative Study of Men With Massive Prostate Volumes ≥150 mL and <150 mL.

OBJECTIVE: To assess outcomes following Holmium Laser Enucleation of Prostate (HoLEP) in men with prostate volumes ≥150cc and compare this to men with prostate volumes ≤150 cc. PATIENTS & METHODS: We analyzed our prospective database of consecutive patients undergoing HoLEP in a single tertiary public hospital between October 2016 and January 2019. We excluded patients with clinically significant prostate cancer or neurogenic bladders. Preoperative prostate volume was measured on MRI or ultrasonography. Perioperative variables and functional outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: Of 304 HoLEPs performed, we included 97 patients with prostate volume of ≥150 cc and 186 patients with prostate volume <150 cc. Comparing both cohorts (≥150 cc vs <150 cc): mean age was 71.5 vs 68.3 years, prostate volume 195 cc vs 93 cc, preoperative Qmax 9.6mL/s vs 10mL/s, American Urology Association Symptom Score (IPSS) 21 points vs 20.5 points; mean PSA 13.2µg/L vs 8.8µg/L; laser duration 86 vs 59 minutes; morcellation duration 29 vs 14 minutes; enucleated weight was 124 g vs 60 g. One patient (1%) from the ≥150 cc cohort required a surgical procedure for stress urinary incontinence, and none from the <150 cc cohort, but this did not achieve statistical significance (P = .12). There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative Qmax (32.3 vs 26.4 mL/s; P = .12), IPSS (5.9 points vs 7.3points; P = .23), mean PSA (3.9 µg/L vs 2.2 µg/L; P = .60), stricture incidence (1% vs 2.7%; P = .63), or significant stress urinary incontinence (4.1% vs 0.5%; P = .08). CONCLUSION: Our large series demonstrates that HoLEP is safe and effective in patients with massive prostates (≥150 cc), with similar outcomes compared to patients with prostates <150 cc.

STROCSS 2021: Strengthening the reporting of cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies in surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Strengthening The Reporting Of Cohort Studies in Surgery (STROCSS) guidelines were developed in 2017 in order to improve the reporting quality of observational studies in surgery and updated in 2019. In order to maintain relevance and continue upholding good reporting quality among observational studies in surgery, we aimed to update STROCSS 2019 guidelines. METHODS: A STROCSS 2021 steering group was formed to come up with proposals to update STROCSS 2019 guidelines. An expert panel of researchers assessed these proposals and judged whether they should become part of STROCSS 2021 guidelines or not, through a Delphi consensus exercise. RESULTS: 42 people (89%) completed the DELPHI survey and hence participated in the development of STROCSS 2021 guidelines. All items received a score between 7 and 9 by greater than 70% of the participants, indicating a high level of agreement among the DELPHI group members with the proposed changes to all the items. CONCLUSION: We present updated STROCSS 2021 guidelines to ensure ongoing good reporting quality among observational studies in surgery.