Ureteroscopia flexible sin vaina de acceso ureteral / Flexible ureteroscopy without ureteral access sheath

Introducción: La vaina de acceso ureteral (VAU) se utiliza ampliamente en la ureteroscopia flexible con litotricia con láser (URSF) por sus mejores tasas de estado libre de cálculos, menor presión intrarrenal y menos complicaciones. Sin embargo, también aumenta los costes quirúrgicos y puede lesionar la pared ureteral. El objetivo principal de nuestro estudio es comparar la seguridad y la eficacia de la URSF con y sin VAU para evaluar la justificación de su uso en todos los casos.Materiales y métodos: Hemos llevado a cabo un estudio analítico observacional retrospectivo con una base de datos prospectiva. Se incluyeron para el análisis un total de 241 pacientes consecutivos que se sometieron a URSF para el tratamiento de cálculos renales y de uréter superior entre enero de 2018 y mayo de 2020 y se dividieron en dos grupos según el uso dela VAU. Se compararon los datos demográficos, las características de los cálculos, la presentación, el tiempo operatorio, la necesidad de catéter ureteral, la infección urinaria posoperatoria, el cólico renal y la necesidad de procedimientos adicionales.Resultados: Un total de 198 pacientes (82,2%) conformaron el grupo sin VAU. El tiempo operatorio fue significativamente menor en el grupo de pacientes sin VAU que en los tratados con VAU (64,6 minutos ± 29,5 vs. 89,9 minutos ±2,8, respectivamente; p 0,010). Ambos grupos presentaron tasas similares de dolor renal e infección del tracto urinario. Los procedimientos auxiliares fueron más frecuentes en el grupo con VAU (37,2 vs. 21,2%; p 0,026), pero no hubo significación en el análisis multivariante.Conclusión: La URSF sin VAU parece ser tan segura como la URSF con VAU, pero requiere menos procedimientos adicionales. Otra de las ventajas es un menor tiempo operatorio (AU)

Introduction: Ureteral access sheath (UAS) is widely used in flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy (FURS) based on better stone-free rates, lower intrarenal pressure and fewer complications. However, it also rises surgical costs and may injure the ureteral wall. The main objective of our study is to compare safety and efficacy of FURS with and without UAS to evaluate whether its use is justified in all cases.Materials and methods: We performed a retrospective observational analytic study based on a prospective database. A total of 241 consecutive patients who underwent FURS for upper ureter and renal stones between January 2018 and May 2020 were included for analysis and divided into two groups upon UAS use. We compared demographic data, stone characteristics, prestenting, operative time, need for ureteral stent, postoperative urinary tract infection, renal colic and need for ancillary procedures.Results: A total of 198 patients (82.2%) were included in the group without UAS. Operative time was significantly shorter in the group of patients without UAS than those with UAS (64.6 minutes ± 29.5 vs. 89.9 minutes ± 2.8 respectively; p 0.010). Both groups had similar rates of colic pain and urinary tract infection. Ancillary procedures were more frequent in the UAS group (37.2 vs. 21.2%; p 0.026), but significance was lost in multivariate assessment.Conclusion: FURS without UAS seems to be as safe as FURS with UAS but requires less ancillary procedures. An additional advantage is shorter operative time (AU)

Flexible ureteroscopy without ureteral access sheath.

INTRODUCTION: Ureteral access sheath (UAS) is widely used in flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy (FURS) based on better stone-free rates, lower intrarenal pressure and fewer complications. However, it also rises surgical costs and may injure the ureteral wall. The main objective of our study is to compare safety and efficacy of FURS with and without UAS to evaluate whether its use is justified in all cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational analytic study based on a prospective database. A total of 241 consecutive patients who underwent FURS for upper ureter and renal stones between January 2018 and May 2020 were included for analysis and divided into two groups upon UAS use. We compared demographic data, stone characteristics, prestenting, operative time, need for ureteral stent, postoperative urinary tract infection, renal colic and need for ancillary procedures. RESULTS: A total of 198 patients (82.2%) were included in the group without UAS. Operative time was significantly shorter in the group of patients without UAS than those with UAS (64.6 minutes ± 29.5 vs. 89.9 minutes ± 2.8 respectively; p 0.010). Both groups had similar rates of colic pain and urinary tract infection. Ancillary procedures were more frequent in the UAS group (37.2 vs. 21.2%; p 0.026), but significance was lost in multivariate assessment. CONCLUSION: FURS without UAS seems to be as safe as FURS with UAS but requires less ancillary procedures. An additional advantage is shorter operative time.

[Management of malignant ureteral obstruction.] / Manejo de la obstrucción ureteral maligna.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the different therapeutic alternatives in malignant ureteral obstruction (MUO), and to analyze short and long-term results. METHODS: We conducted a bibliographic search about MUO in Spanish and English languages in PubMed and Google Scholar. We examined the most relevant reviews, original manuscripts and their respective citations. Last search was on April 2016. RESULTS: Polymeric double J stent is the cheapest and most accessible internal urinary diversion, but has also the shortest duration. Early and late failure rates were 0-35% and 14-49% respectively. Mean time to late failure was 3-12 months. Percutaneous nephrostomy is the safest alternative in terms of failure rates, though it has frequent complications such as tube dislodgement, and may have a negative effect on quality of life. The only metallic double J stent with enough bibliographic background is the Resonance® stent. Early failure was 0-15% and late failure 4-41%, with a mean time to late failure of 2.6-13 months. Regarding metallic stents, Memokath 051® has obtained the best results, with 0-5% early failure rates, 19-49% late failures and mean time to late failure of 7-11 months. In patients with polymeric double J stent failure, patients benefited from tandem double J stents, metallic double J catheters or metallic stents, avoiding the need of a percutaneous nephrostomy. The evidence level was low in all cases. CONCLUSIONS: Results in MUO are very heterogeneous and have a low evidence level. Factors that influence results include stent characteristics, status and prognosis of the obstructive condition and probably patient and physician's preferences. Polymeric double J stents seem to have higher early and late failure rates than metallic double J catheters and metallic stents. Even though, the difference is not clearly evident. Prospective, multicenter, multidisciplinary trials are necessary to elucidate convenience and adequate selection of each type of stent.

¿Resulta necesaria la colocación de una pinza quirúrgica tempranamente en el cordón espermático durante la exploración testicular por vía inguinal? / Is It Necessary to Place a Surgical Clamp Early in the Spermatic Cord During Testicular Examination Via Inguinal Approach?

Objetivo: Se evalúa la presencia de células tumorales en el cordón espermático en pacientes sometidos a exploración testicular inguinal, con intención de avalar si la colocación de una pinza en el mismo resulta necesaria para evitar la diseminación tumoral. Material y métodos: Durante dos años se realizó exploración testicular inguinal a 38 pacientes con diagnóstico de masa testicular. En todos los pacientes se evaluó la presencia de células tumorales en los vasos sanguíneos o linfáticos del cordón. Resultados: Existió neoplasia testicular en 28 pacientes (20 seminoma, 5 tumor mixto y tres carcinoma embrionario) con una edad promedio de 42 años (rango 21-82). Fueron T1N0M0 21 casos, T1N1M0 tres, T2N0M0 dos y T2N1M0 dos, respectivamente. Independientemente del estadio y estirpe tumoral, en ninguno de los casos el examen de anatomía patológica evidencio células tumorales en los vasos del cordón. Conclusión: En nuestra casuística parece que el gesto quirúrgico consistente en colocar una pinza precozmente en el cordón carece de fundamento científico. Sin embargo, este estudio tampoco permite afirmar que no realizar esta maniobra durante el procedimiento quirúrgico sea oncológicamente seguro. Se establece así un precedente para realizar estudios con mayor número de pacientes que permitan corroborar esta observación, lo que redundará en técnicas quirúrgicas menos traumáticas y seguras que permitan preservar el testículo y su funcionalidad (AU)

Objective: The presence of tumor cells in the spermatic cord was evaluated in patients undergoing inguinal testis study in order to assure if the placement of a clamp in it was necessary to avoid tumor dissemination. Material and methods: Inguinal testis studies were performed over a two year period in 38 patients diagnosed of testicular mass. The presence of tumor cells in blood vessels or lymph nodes of the cord was evaluated in all of the patients. Results: Testicular tumors were found in 28 patients (20 seminoma, 5 mixed tumor and 3 embryonal) with an average age of 42 (range 21-82) years. There were T1N0M0 21; T1N1M0 3; T2N0M0 2 and T2N1M0 2 cases, respectively. Independently of the stage and tumor lineage, tumor cells in the cord vessels were not observed in any of the cases through the pathology study. Conclusion: In our causistics, it seems that the surgical act consisting in the placement of a clamp early in the cord lacks a scientific foundation. However, this study does not make it possible to state that not performing this maneuver during the surgical procedure is oncologically safe. Thus, a precedent is established to perform studies with a larger number of patients that will make it possible to corroborate this observation. This would result in less traumatic and safer surgical techniques that would allow conserving the testis and its functionality (AU)

[Is it necessary to place a surgical clamp early in the spermatic cord during testicular examination via inguinal approach?]. / ¿Resulta necesaria la colocación de una pinza quirúrgica tempranamente en el cordón espermático durante la exploración testicular por vía inguinal?

OBJECTIVE: The presence of tumor cells in the spermatic cord was evaluated in patients undergoing inguinal testis study in order to assure if the placement of a clamp in it was necessary to avoid tumor dissemination. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Inguinal testis studies were performed over a two year period in 38 patients diagnosed of testicular mass. The presence of tumor cells in blood vessels or lymph nodes of the cord was evaluated in all of the patients. RESULTS: Testicular tumors were found in 28 patients (20 seminoma, 5 mixed tumor and 3 embryonal) with an average age of 42 (range 21-82) years. There were T1N0M0 21; T1N1M0 3; T2N0M0 2 and T2N1M0 2 cases, respectively. Independently of the stage and tumor lineage, tumor cells in the cord vessels were not observed in any of the cases through the pathology study. CONCLUSION: In our causistics, it seems that the surgical act consisting in the placement of a clamp early in the cord lacks a scientific foundation. However, this study does not make it possible to state that not performing this maneuver during the surgical procedure is oncologically safe. Thus, a precedent is established to perform studies with a larger number of patients that will make it possible to corroborate this observation. This would result in less traumatic and safer surgical techniques that would allow conserving the testis and its functionality.