Does postal consent for flexible cystoscopy work?

BACKGROUND: Informed consent is an integral part of the process prior to any surgical procedure [1]. Flexible cystoscopy is a common day case urological procedure and it is the gold standard investigation for visible haematuria [2]. AIM: To assess if postal consent is a suitable form of gaining informed consent for flexible cystoscopy. METHODS: Patients booked for a flexible cystoscopy are initially reviewed in clinic. An information leaflet with an attached consent form is then posted to their home 2 weeks prior to their procedure. We designed a short questionnaire, to assess patient's satisfaction and understanding of the literature, given to them after the procedure. RESULTS: Sixty-seven questionnaires were completed. The mean age was 54. Sixty patients (93%) think that postal consent is of benefit to the patient. Sixty-one patients (91%) read the information sheet and felt that there was enough information regarding the procedure on it. Fifty-four patients (81%) had no difficulty understanding the consent form. Forty patients (60%) signed the form prior to arrival in the hospital. CONCLUSION: Postal consent is commonly used for gastro-intestinal endoscopy procedures. Postal consent for flexible cystoscopy is not well reported in the literature. Our study shows postal consent to be a suitable form of gaining informed consent for flexible cystoscopy.

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate in an Irish prostate cancer patient cohort-an aggressive pathology and a strong familial link.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) is poorly studied in the Irish population. This study investigated the incidence and clinicopathologic characteristics of IDC-P in an Irish prostate cancer (PCa) patient cohort. The study also discusses the rationale for genetic counseling and screening in Irish patients with familial risk factors for IDC-P. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study investigated patients diagnosed with IDC-P on prostate biopsy from 2012 to 2016. Primary outcome measurements were incidence, management, and clinical outcomes after follow-up in patients with IDC-P. The secondary outcome measurement was to identify a familial link for IDC-P. RESULTS: A total of 1,143 patients were diagnosed with PCa on needle biopsy, of which 30 (2.3%) had concomitant IDC-P. Mean age and prostate-specific antigen at diagnosis were 68.6 ± 10.5 years (range 53-85 years) and 9.15 ± 8.65 ng/mL (range 2.1-166 ng/mL), respectively. In total, 17 of 30 patients (57%) were diagnosed with concomitant high-grade (i.e., ≥Gleason score 8) PCa. Eight patients (27%) were treated with radical prostatectomy; of which five had biochemical recurrence (BCR) after 10.55 ± 25.9 months. Eleven patients (37%) received radical radiotherapy; of which one had BCR after 36 months. Eleven patients (37%) presented with advanced PCa and were managed with androgen deprivation therapy ± chemotherapy. A family history for PCa in first-degree relatives was found in eight patients (27%). CONCLUSIONS: IDC-P is associated with more aggressive clinicopathologic features and an increased risk of BCR after treatment. In Ireland, clinical guidelines and a genetic screening pathway are required to provide early detection and appropriate multimodal management of patients with IDC-P.

Ureteric stenting with magnetic retrieval: an alternative to traditional methods.

INTRODUCTION: Ureteric stents are frequently placed following endo-urological procedures. These stents cause significant morbidity for patients. Standard ureteric stents are removed by flexible cystoscopy. This procedure can be unpleasant for patients and requires additional resources. A newly designed magnetic stent allows removal in an outpatient setting. The aim of our study is to compare the magnetic stent and standard ureteric stents with regard to morbidity, pain on stent removal and cost-effectiveness. METHODS: This study was carried out across two sites between September 2016 and July 2017. In site A, a magnetic stent (Urotech, Black-Star®) is removed by magnetic retrieval device. Fifty consecutive patients completed the validated Ureteric Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ) and visual analogue scale (VAS) at the time of stent removal. On site B, a soft polyurethane stent (Cook Universa) was removed by flexible cystoscopy. Fifty patients were identified retrospectively and completed questionnaires by post. Cost analysis was also performed. RESULTS: One hundred questionnaires were included for analysis. No significant difference in stent morbidity as assessed by the USSQ was shown between both groups. Median duration of stenting was significantly shorter in the magnetic stent group (5.5 versus 21.5 days, p < 0.001). Mean pain on stent removal was significantly less with magnetic retrieval (2.9 versus 3.9, p < 0.05). Complication rates were similar in both groups. Cost analysis showed a cost saving of €203 per patient with the magnetic stent group. CONCLUSION: Magnetic stents cause similar morbidity for patients compared with standard stents removed by flexible cystoscopy; they are associated with less pain at removal and are cost saving.