RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Ambulatory percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) has been limited to highly selected patients. The objective of our study was to compare complication and stone-free rates after ambulatory PCNL in standard selection criteria vs. extended criteria patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of prospective data on all patients who underwent ambulatory PCNL at one academic center from 2007-2018. Extended criteria patients were defined as one or more of: age >75 years, body mass index (BMI) >30 kg/m2, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score >2, bilateral stones, solitary kidney, transplant kidney, complete staghorn calculi, stone burden >40 mm, multiple tracts, or prior nephrostomy tubes/stents. Primary outcomes were complication rates (Clavien-Dindo classification) and stone-free rates. RESULTS: We identified 118 patients, of which 92 (78%) met extended criteria. Mean BMI was 31 kg/m2 and 45% were ASA 3 or higher. Mean sum maximum stone diameter was 24 mm. Multiple stones were present in 25%, bilateral stones in 7%, and complete staghorn stones in 4% of patients. There was no difference in complication (12% vs. 18%, p=0.56), emergency department visit (12% vs. 18%, p=0.56), or re-admission (4% vs. 5%, p=1) rates between standard and extended criteria patients, respectively. Of the complications, 85% were Clavien-Dindo grade 1. Stone-free rates were not different between standard (84%) and extended (83%) criteria patients (p=1). No extended criteria variables were associated with complications in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Complication and stone-free rates were not different between standard and extended selection criteria patients undergoing ambulatory PCNL. This data indicates that many of the preoperative patient and stone factors that have previously been used as exclusion criteria for ambulatory PCNL are not strictly necessary.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The importance of developing inter-professional communication and leadership skills among residents is well-recognized; however, formal tools to assess these skills are lacking. The goal of our study was to assess the leader and communicator roles in graduating urology residents using a validated self-assessment form developed for business students that focuses on inter-professional skills. METHODS: Chief residents (n=36) were evaluated with surveys of communication and leadership skills. The same surveys were administered through email to the residents' program directors (PDs). Resident self-assessment and PD assessment were compared using paired and non-paired t-tests. RESULTS: Graduating urology residents' self-assessment of their communication and leadership skills did not differ from assessments made by their PDs (77.6 vs. 74.4%; p=0.19); however, there were outlier candidates in whom PD assessment differed substantially from self-assessment on both surveys. Graduating urology residents scored themselves higher on self-awareness (82.6 vs. 77%; p= 0.05) and lower on stress management (67.7 vs. 77%; p= 0.01) compared to their PDs. Resident self-assessment scores were similar to business students on both communication and leadership surveys. Limitations were the small sample size and lack of survey evaluation by those surveyed. CONCLUSIONS: Graduating urology residents' self-assessment of their own communication and leadership skills did not differ greatly from assessment by their PDs or a sample of business students. Comparison of self-assessment evaluations and evaluations by PDs allowed us to identify outliers in whom self-assessment and PD-assessment markedly differed, which may allow for more focused and meaningful feedback.
