IBD-PODCAST Spain: A Close Look at Current Daily Clinical Practice in IBD Management.

BACKGROUND: Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) are inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) that contributes in part to irreversible bowel damage and long-term complications, reduced quality of life, invalidity, and economic burden. Suboptimal control of IBD is associated with higher healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), impaired quality of life (QoL), and reduced work productivity. AIMS: The IBD-PODCAST study aimed to assess the proportion of IBD patients with suboptimal control and its associated impact. METHODS: IBD-PODCAST is a cross-sectional, multicenter study that aimed to characterize the CD and UC population with optimal or suboptimal control according to the STRIDE-II criteria and patient- and physician-reported measures. Here we present the results of the Spanish cohort (n = 396). RESULTS: A total of 104/196 (53.1%) CD and 83/200 (41.5%) UC patients were found to have suboptimal disease control. Long-term treatment targets according to STRIDE-II were applied in 172 (87.8%) CD and 181 (90.5%) UC patients. 125 of 172 (72.7%) CD and 74 of 181 (40.9%) UC patients were currently treated with targeted immunomodulators. Patients with CD and UC and suboptimal disease control showed impaired QoL, higher HCRU and direct costs, and also loss of work productivity compared to those with optimal control. CONCLUSION: Despite a high rate of targeted immunomodulator therapy, a substantial proportion of IBD patients show suboptimal disease control according to the STRIDE II criteria. Those patients with suboptimal disease control exhibit impaired QoL, less work productivity, and higher HCRU, suggesting that there is considerable need for better treatment approaches in IBD.

Indicaciones e histología de 489 orquiectomías analizadas según la edad del paciente / Indications and histology of 489 orchiectomies analyzed by patient age

Objetivo Evaluar indicaciones e histología de nuestra serie de orquiectomías, analizando los resultados dependiendo de la edad del paciente. Métodos Estudio de las orquiectomías realizadas en nuestro centro entre 2005 y 2020 a pacientes mayores de 18 años. Evaluamos: datos demográficos, indicaciones, histología y efectividad del diagnóstico ecográfico según 3 grupos de edad. Resultados Se realizaron 489 orquiectomías, 364 (74%) en los pacientes entre 18-50 años (grupo A), 59 (12%) entre los pacientes de 51-70 años (grupo B) y 66 (13,4%) en mayores de 70 años (grupo C). En el grupo A, 284 (78%) orquiectomías fueron indicadas por sospecha tumoral, 261/284 (91,9%) fueron neoplasias malignas, 253 (89%) germinales. La ecografía testicular tuvo un valor predictivo positivo (VPP) para tumor testicular maligno del 90%. En el grupo B, 34 (57%) orquiectomías fueron indicadas por sospecha tumoral y 25/34 (73,5%) presentaron neoplasias malignas. La ecografía tuvo un VPP para malignidad del 68%. En el grupo C, la orquiepididimitis fue la causa más frecuente de orquiectomía con 30 casos (45,5%). Entre las 20 orquiectomías por sospecha de tumor (30,3%), se encontró malignidad en 6. La ecografía tuvo un VPP para malignidad del 31%. Conclusión En menores de 70 años la indicación principal de orquiectomía fue la sospecha tumoral y en mayores, la orquiepididimitis. Los tumores germinales fueron la histología más frecuente en los menores de 70 años; en los mayores la malignidad fue infrecuente. Con la edad, disminuyó el VPP de la ecografía testicular para neoplasia maligna. En los mayores de 50 años se debería mejorar el proceso diagnóstico antes de indicar orquiectomía por sospecha tumoral (AU)

Objective To evaluate the indications and histology of our series of orchiectomies, analysing the results by patient's age. Methods We included the orchiectomies realized in our hospital between 2005 and 2020 in patients older than 18 years. We estimated demographic data, indications, histology and effectiveness of testicular ultrasound by three groups of age. Results We included 489 orchiectomies, which 364 (74%) belonged to group A (patients between 18-50 years), 59 (12%) to group B (50-70 years) and 66 (14%) to group C (older than 70 years). In group A, 284 (78%) orchiectomies were indicated due to malignancy suspect. In 91.9% cases (261) malign neoplasm was confirmed at final histology and 253 (89%) were germinal cells. Testicular ultrasound had a positive predictive value (PPV) of 90% in this group. In group B, 34 (57%) orchiectomies were indicated because of malignancy suspect. At final histologic analysis, 25/34 (73.5%) confirmed malign neoplasm. Ultrasound had a PPV of 68%. In group C, orchiepididymitis was the main cause of testicular removal with 30 cases (45,5%). From the 20 cases (30.3%) with suspicion of malignancy, only 6 had confirmed malign histology. Testicular ultrasound PPV for malignancy was 31%. Conclusion In patients younger than 70 years the main orchiectomy's indication was suspect of malignancy and in older than 70, testicular inflammation. The germinal neoplasm was the predominant histology in younger than 70 years. In older than that, malignancy was infrequent. The positive predictive value of testicular ultrasound for malignancy decreased with patient's age. In patients older than 50 years proper image diagnosis to assess malignancy should be considered before orchiectomy is done (AU)

Impacto clínico de no aplicar el protocolo ERAS en los pacientes sometidos a cistectomía durante la pandemia COVID-19 / Clinical impact of the suspension of the ERAS protocol on patients undergoing radical cystectomy during the COVID-19 pandemic

Introducción Al inicio de la pandemia por COVID-19 no se pudo implementar ni prehabilitación ni rehabilitación multimodal por sobrecarga del sistema sanitario. Nuestro objetivo fue analizar evolución, complicaciones y supervivencia hasta el año de pacientes sometidos a cistectomía radical en nuestro centro desde el 1 de marzo hasta el 31 de mayo de 2020 (primera ola). Comparamos resultados con pacientes también cistectomizados fuera de pandemia donde sí estaba instaurado el protocolo ERAS. Material y métodos Estudio de cohortes retrospectivo, unicéntrico, de pacientes programados para cistectomía radical desde el 1 de marzo de 2020 hasta el 31 de mayo de 2020; se emparejaron con pacientes intervenidos anteriormente a través de score de emparejamiento por propensión 1:2. Las variables de emparejamiento fueron datos demográficos, condiciones clínicas preoperatorias e intraoperatorias. Resultados Se realizaron 23 cistectomía en este periodo; en ningún caso se aplicó ni prehabilitación ni seguimiento del protocolo ERAS, y esta fue la única diferencia en el tratamiento entre grupos. Tres pacientes se diagnosticaron de COVID-19 durante su ingreso presentando complicaciones respiratorias graves y alta mortalidad intrahospitalaria. La tasa de transfusión sanguínea fue mayor en el grupo pandemia. La estancia hospitalaria aumentó en tres días en grupo pandemia. Conclusiones Los pacientes sometidos a cistectomía en nuestro centro durante la primera ola de pandemia por COVID-19 presentaron complicaciones respiratorias y no respiratorias en mayor número y más graves que los cistectomizados fuera de este periodo. La no aplicación del protocolo ERAS fue la principal diferencia en el tratamiento entre grupos (AU)

Introduction During the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in our center, neither prehabilitation nor multimodal rehabilitation could be applied due to the excessive patient load on the health system and to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission. The objective of our study was to analyze the evolution, complications, and survival up to one year of patients who underwent radical cystectomy in our hospital from March 1st to May 31st, 2020 (period of the first wave COVID-19 pandemic in Spain). We also compared the results with cystectomized patients outside the pandemic period and with application of the ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) protocol. Material and methods Single-center, retrospective cohort study of patients scheduled for radical cystectomy from March 1st,2020 to May 31st, 2020. They were matched with previously operated patients using a 1:2 propensity matching score. The matching variables were demographic data, preoperative and intraoperative clinical conditions. Results A total of 23 radical cystectomies with urinary diversion were performed in the period described. In none of the cases the prehabilitation or the follow-up of our ERAS protocol could be applied, and this was the only difference we found between the 2 groups. Although the minimally invasive approach was more frequent in the pandemic group, the difference was not statistically significant. Three patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 during their admission, presenting severe respiratory complications and high in-hospital mortality. Apart from respiratory complications secondary to SARS-CoV-2, we also found statistically significant differences in other postoperative complications. The hospital stay increased by 3 days in the pandemic group (AU)

Cistectomía radical asistida por robot vs. cistectomía radical abierta: revisión sistemática de ensayos controlados aleatorizados / Robot-assisted vs. open radical cystectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Introducción En la última década se han puesto en marcha varios ensayos controlados aleatorizados (ECA) con el objetivo de evaluar la seguridad quirúrgica y la eficacia oncológica de la cistectomía radical asistida por robot (CRAR) frente a la cistectomía radical abierta (CRA) en pacientes con cáncer de vejiga. El objetivo del estudio fue realizar una revisión sistemática y un metaanálisis de ECA para comparar los resultados perioperatorios y oncológicos de ambas. Métodos Se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica hasta julio de 2022 en las bases de datos PubMed/Medline, Embase y Web of Science. Se siguieron las directrices de la declaración PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) para identificar los estudios elegibles. Los criterios de evaluación fueron los resultados intraoperatorios, postoperatorios y oncológicos de la CRAR frente a la CRA. Resultados Un total de 8ECA con 1.024 pacientes cumplieron los criterios de inclusión. La CRAR se asoció con un tiempo quirúrgico mayor (media de 92,34 min, IC 95%: 83,83-100,84; p<0,001) y una tasa de transfusión de sangre menor (odds ratio [OR] 0,43; IC 95%: 0,30-0,61; p<0,001). No se observaron diferencias en cuanto a las complicaciones globales (p=0,28) ni graves (p=0,57) a los 90 días, la duración de la estancia hospitalaria (p=0,18), la recuperación de la función intestinal (p=0,67), la calidad de vida relacionada con la salud (p=0,86), la recurrencia (p=0,77) ni la progresión (p=0,49) de la enfermedad entre los 2abordajes. La principal limitación reside en el bajo número de pacientes incluidos en el 50% de los ECA revisados. Conclusiones Este estudio respalda la no inferioridad de la CRAR respecto a la CRA en términos de seguridad quirúrgica y resultados oncológicos. El beneficio de tasas reducidas de transfusión sanguínea obtenido con la CRAR debe sopesarse con relación a los costes derivados del procedimiento (AU)

Introduction Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been launched in the last decade to examine the surgical safety and oncological efficacy of robot-assisted (RARC) vs. open radical cystectomy (ORC) for patients with bladder cancer. The aim of the study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs to compare the perioperative and oncological outcomes of RARC vs. ORC. Methods A literature search was conducted through July 2022 using PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed to identify eligible studies. The outcomes were intraoperative, postoperative, and oncological outcomes of RARC vs. ORC. Results A total of 8RCTs comprising 1,024 patients met our inclusion criteria. RARC was associated with longer operative time (mean 92.34min, 95% CI: 83.83-100.84, P<0.001) and lower blood transfusion rate (Odds ratio [OR] 0.43, 95% CI: 0.30-0.61, P<0.001). No differences emerged in terms of 90-day overall (P=0.28) and major (P=0.57) complications, length of stay (P=0.18), bowel recovery (P=0.67), health-related quality of life (P=0.86), disease recurrence (P=0.77) and progression (P=0.49) between the 2approaches. The main limitation is represented by the low number of patients included in half of RCTs included. Conclusions This study supports that RARC is not inferior to ORC in terms of surgical safety and oncological outcomes. The benefit of RARC in terms of lower blood transfusion rate need to be balanced with the cost related to the procedure (AU)

Manejo del carcinoma in situ de tramo urinario superior diagnosticado por biopsia ureteroscópica: ¿es el bacilo de Calmette-Guérin una alternativa a la nefroureterectomía? / Management of primary upper urinary tract carcinoma in situ diagnosed by ureteroscopic biopsy: Is bacillus Calmette-Guerin an alternative to nephroureterectomy?

Introducción La nefroureterectomía radical (NFU) es el tratamiento estándar del carcinoma de tramo urinario superior (TUS). No obstante, desde 1985 se ha introducido el tratamiento conservador en el manejo del carcinoma in situ en TUS (cis-TUS). El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar la evolución oncológica de los pacientes con cis-TUS tratados en nuestro centro con NFU vs. instilaciones de bacilo de Calmette-Guérin (BCG). Métodos Se trata de un estudio retrospectivo de pacientes con diagnóstico de cis-TUS primario entre 1990-2018. Todos los pacientes presentaban diagnóstico histológico de cis-TUS con ausencia de otro carcinoma de TUS concomitante. La confirmación histológica se obtuvo mediante ureteroscopia con múltiples biopsias. Los pacientes fueron tratados mediante NFU, ureterectomía distal o instilaciones de BCG. Los datos clinicopatológicos y la evolución oncológica fue comparada entre los grupos NFU y BCG. Resultados Se incluyeron un total de 28 pacientes, 29 unidades renales (UR). Dieciséis (57,1%) pacientes (17 UR) recibieron BCG. Las instilaciones fueron administradas por nefrostomía en 4 pacientes, catéter en J simple en 5 y doble J en 7. La respuesta completa y la persistencia o recurrencia fueron detectadas en 10 (58,8%) y 7 (41,2) UR tratadas con BCG. Ocho UR (27,6%) fueron tratadas con NFU, con una recurrencia contralateral detectada en 4 casos (50%). Finalmente, 4 UR con cis-TUS (13,8%) fueron tratadas con ureterectomía distal. No se detectaron diferencias en la supervivencia libre de recurrencia (p=0,841) ni en la supervivencia cáncer específica (p=0,77) entre los grupos de NFU y BCG. Conclusiones Aunque la nefroureterectomía radical representa el tratamiento estándar para el CIS de tramo urinario superior, nuestros resultados confirman que las instilaciones con BCG también son efectivas. La confirmación histológica de cis-TUS debería realizarse previamente a la decisión terapéutica (AU)

Introduction Radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) still represents the gold standard treatment for upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC); however, since the 1980s attempts have been made to treat upper urinary tract CIS (UT-CIS) conservatively. The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of patients with primary UT-CIS treated in our center by means of RNU vs. bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) instillations. Methods This retrospective study included patients with diagnosis of primary UT-CIS between 1990 and 2018. All patients had histological confirmation of UT-CIS in the absence of other concomitant UTUC. Histological confirmation was obtained by ureteroscopy with multiple biopsies. Patients were treated with RNU, distal ureterectomy, or BCG instillations. Clinicopathological features and outcomes were compared between the RNU and BCG groups. Results A total of 28 patients and 29 renal units (RUs) were included. Sixteen (57.1%) patients (17 RUs) received BCG. BCG was administered via a nephrostomy tube in 4 patients, a single-J ureteral stent in 5, and a Double-J stent in 7. Complete response and persistence or recurrence were detected in ten (58.8%) and seven (41.2%) RUs treated with BCG, respectively. Eight (27.6%) RUs underwent RNU, with contralateral recurrence detected in four (50%), and 4 (13.8%) RUs underwent distal ureterectomy. No differences were found in recurrence-free survival (p=0.841) and cancer-specific survival (p=0.77) between the RNU and BCG groups. Conclusions Although RNU remains the gold standard treatment for UT-CIS, our results confirm that BCG instillations are also effective. Histological confirmation of UT-CIS is mandatory before any treatment (AU)

Reduced- vs full-dose BCG in bladder cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the oncologic outcomes and the safety profile of a reduced-dose versus full-dose BCG regimen in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a systematic review according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched in January 2022 for studies that analyzed oncological outcomes and compared between reduced- and full-dose BCG regimens. RESULTS: Seventeen studies including 3757 patients met our inclusion criteria. Patients who received reduced-dose BCG had significantly higher recurrence rates (OR 1.19; 95%CI, 1.03-1.36; p = 0.02). The risks of progression to muscle-invasive BC (OR 1.04; 95%CI, 0.83-1.32; p = 0.71), metastasis (OR 0.82; 95%CI, 0.55-1.22; p = 0.32), death from BC (OR 0.80; 95%CI, 0.57-1.14; p = 0.22), and all-cause death (OR 0.82; 95%CI, 0.53-1.27; p = 0.37) were not statistically different. When restricting the analyses to randomized controlled trials, we found similar results. In subgroup analysis, reduced dose was associated with a higher rate of BC recurrence in studies that used only an induction regimen (OR 1.70; 95%CI, 1.19-2.42; p = 0.004), but not when a maintenance regimen was used (OR 1.07; 95%CI, 0.96-1.29; p = 0.17). Regarding side effects, the reduced-dose BCG regimen was associated with fewer episodes of fever (p = 0.003), and therapy discontinuation (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: This review found no association between BCG dose and BC progression, metastasis, and mortality. There was an association between reduced dose and BC recurrence, which was no longer significant when a maintenance regimen was used. In times of BCG shortage, reduced-dose regimens could be offered to BC patients.

Robot-assisted vs. open radical cystectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been launched in the last decade to examine the surgical safety and oncological efficacy of robot-assisted (RARC) vs open radical cystectomy (ORC) for patients with bladder cancer. The aim of the study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs to compare the perioperative and oncological outcomes of RARC vs ORC. METHODS: A literature search was conducted through July 2022 using PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed to identify eligible studies. The outcomes were intraoperative, postoperative, and oncological outcomes of RARC vs ORC. RESULTS: A total of eight RCTs comprising 1,024 patients met our inclusion criteria. RARC was associated with longer operative time (mean 92.34min, 95% CI 83.83-100.84, p<0.001) and lower blood transfusion rate (Odds ratio [OR] 0.43, 95% CI 0.30-0.61, p<0.001). No differences emerged in terms of 90-day overall (p=0.28) and major (p=0.57) complications, length of stay (p=0.18), bowel recovery (p=0.67), health-related quality of life (p=0.86), disease recurrence (p=0.77) and progression (p=0.49) between the two approaches. The main limitation is represented by the low number of patients included in half of RCTs included. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports that RARC is not inferior to ORC in terms of surgical safety and oncological outcomes. The benefit of RARC in terms of lower blood transfusion rate need to be balanced with the cost related to the procedure.

[CLINICAL IMPACT OF THE SUSPENSION OF THE ERAS PROTOCOL ON PATIENTS UNDERGOING RADICAL CYSTECTOMY DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC.] / IMPACTO CLÍNICO DE NO APLICAR EL PROTOCOLO ERAS EN LOS PACIENTES SOMETIDOS A CISTECTOMÍA DURANTE LA PANDEMIA COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: During the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in our center, neither prehabilitation nor multimodal rehabilitation could be applied due to the excessive patient load on the health system and to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission. The objective of our study was to analyze the evolution, complications, and survival up to one year of patients who underwent radical cystectomy in our hospital from March 1st to May 31st, 2020 (period of the first wave COVID-19 pandemic in Spain). We also compared the results with cystectomized patients outside the pandemic period and with application of the ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) protocol. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Single-center, retrospective cohort study of patients scheduled for radical cystectomy from March 1st,2020 to May 31st, 2020. They were matched with previously operated patients using a 1:2 propensity matching score. The matching variables were demographic data, preoperative and intraoperative clinical conditions. RESULTS: A total of 23 radical cystectomies with urinary diversion were performed in the period described. In none of the cases the prehabilitation or the follow-up of our ERAS protocol could be applied, and this was the only difference we found between the 2 groups. Although the minimally invasive approach was more frequent in the pandemic group, the difference was not statistically significant. Three patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 during their admission, presenting severe respiratory complications and high in-hospital mortality. Apart from respiratory complications secondary to SARS-CoV-2, we also found statistically significant differences in other postoperative complications. The hospital stay increased by 3 days in the pandemic group. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent radical cystectomy at our center during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic had a higher number and severity of respiratory and non-respiratory complications. Discontinuation of the ERAS protocol was the main difference in treatment between groups.

Clinical impact of the suspension of the ERAS protocol on patients undergoing radical cystectomy during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: During the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in our center, neither prehabilitation nor multimodal rehabilitation could be applied due to the excessive patient load on the health system and to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission. The objective of our study was to analyze the evolution, complications, and survival up to one year of patients who underwent radical cystectomy in our hospital from March 1st to May 31st, 2020 (period of the first wave COVID-19 pandemic in Spain). We also compared the results with cystectomized patients outside the pandemic period and with application of the ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) protocol. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Single-center, retrospective cohort study of patients scheduled for radical cystectomy from March 1st, 2020 to May 31st, 2020. They were matched with previously operated patients using a 1:2 propensity matching score. The matching variables were demographic data, preoperative and intraoperative clinical conditions. RESULTS: A total of 23 radical cystectomies with urinary diversion were performed in the period described. In none of the cases the prehabilitation or the follow-up of our ERAS protocol could be applied, and this was the only difference we found between the 2 groups. Although the minimally invasive approach was more frequent in the pandemic group, the difference was not statistically significant. Three patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 during their admission, presenting severe respiratory complications and high in-hospital mortality. Apart from respiratory complications secondary to SARS-CoV-2, we also found statistically significant differences in other postoperative complications. The hospital stay increased by 3 days in the pandemic group. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent radical cystectomy at our center during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic had a higher number and severity of respiratory and non-respiratory complications. Discontinuation of the ERAS protocol was the main difference in treatment between groups.

Dosis reducida vs. dosis completa de BCG en el cáncer de vejiga: revisión sistemática y metaanálisis / Reduced- vs full-dose BCG in bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objetivo Evaluar los resultados oncológicos y el perfil de seguridad de un régimen de Bacilo Calmette-Guérin (BCG) de dosis reducida frente a uno de dosis completa en pacientes con cáncer de vejiga no músculo infiltrante (CVNMI). Material y métodos Se realizó una revisión sistemática de acuerdo con la declaración Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Se realizaron búsquedas de estudios que analizaran los resultados oncológicos entre los regímenes de BCG con reducción de dosis y dosis completa en las bases de datos PubMed, Embase y Web of Science en enero del 2022. Resultados Diecisiete estudios que incluían a 3.757 pacientes cumplieron los criterios de inclusión. Los pacientes que recibieron reducción de dosis de BCG tuvieron tasas de recidiva significativamente mayores (OR 1,19; IC del 95%, 1,03-1,36; p = 0,02). Los riesgos de progresión a un cáncer de vejiga (CV) músculo infiltrante (OR 1,04; IC 95%, 0,83-1,32; p = 0,71), de metástasis (OR 0,82; IC 95%, 0,55-1,22; p = 0,32), de muerte por CV (OR 0,80; IC 95%, 0,57-1,14; p = 0,22) y de muerte por cualquier causa (OR 0,82; IC 95%, 0,53-1,27; p = 0,37) no fueron estadísticamente diferentes. Al restringir los análisis a ensayos controlados aleatorizados, se encontraron resultados similares. En el análisis de subgrupos, la reducción de dosis se asoció con una mayor tasa de recidiva de CV en los estudios que utilizaron solo un régimen de inducción (OR 1,70; IC 95%, 1,19-2,42; p = 0,004), lo cual no se observó cuando se empleó un régimen de mantenimiento (OR 1,07; IC 95%, 0,96-1,29; p = 0,17). En cuanto a los efectos secundarios, el esquema reducido de BCG se asoció con menos episodios de fiebre (p = 0,003) y de interrupción del tratamiento (p = 0,03). Conclusión Esta revisión no encontró ninguna asociación entre la dosis de BCG y la progresión, la metástasis y la mortalidad del CV (AU)

Objective To assess the oncologic outcomes and the safety profile of a reduced-dose versus full-dose BCG regimen in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). Material and Methods We performed a systematic review according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched in January 2022 for studies that analyzed oncological outcomes and compared between reduced- and full-dose BCG regimens. Results seventeen studies including 3757 patients met our inclusion criteria. Patients who received reduced-dose BCG had significantly higher recurrence rates (OR 1.19; 95%CI, 1.03-1.36; p = 0.02). The risks of progression to muscle-invasive BC (OR 1.04; 95%CI, 0.83-1.32; p = 0.71), metastasis (OR 0.82; 95%CI, 0.55-1.22; p = 0.32), death from BC (OR 0.80; 95%CI, 0.57-1.14; p = 0.22), and all-cause death (OR 0.82; 95%CI, 0.53-1.27; p = 0.37) were not statistically different. When restricting the analyses to randomized controlled trials, we found similar results. In subgroup analysis, reduced dose was associated with a higher rate of BC recurrence in studies that used only an induction regimen (OR 1.70; 95%CI, 1.19-2.42; p = 0.004), but not when a maintenance regimen was used (OR 1.07; 95%CI, 0.96-1.29; p = 0.17). Regarding side effects, the reduced-dose BCG regimen was associated with fewer episodes of fever (p = 0.003), and therapy discontinuation (p = 0.03). Conclusion This review found no association between BCG dose and BC progression, metastasis, and mortality. There was an association between reduced dose and BC recurrence, which was no longer significant when a maintenance regimen was used. In times of BCG shortage, reduced-dose regimens could be offered to BC patients (AU)

Indications and histology of 489 orchiectomies analyzed by patient age.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the indications and histology of our series of orchiectomies, analysing the results by patient's age. METHODS: We included the orchiectomies realized in our hospital between 2005 and 2020 in patients older than 18 years. We estimated demographic data, indications, histology and effectiveness of testicular ultrasound by three groups of age. RESULTS: We included 489 orchiectomies, which 364 (74%) belonged to Group A (patients between 18-50 years), 59 (12%) to Group B (50-70 years) and 66 (14%) to Group C (older than 70 years). In Group A, 284 (78%) orchiectomies were indicated due to malignancy suspect. In 91.9% cases (261) malign neoplasm was confirmed at final histology and 253 (89%) were germinal cells. Testicular ultrasound had a positive predictive value (PPV) of 90% in this group. In Group B, 34 (57%) orchiectomies were indicated because of malignancy suspect. At final histologic analysis, 25/34 (73.5%) confirmed malign neoplasm. Ultrasound had a PPV of 68%. In Group C, orchiepididymitis was the main cause of testicular removal with 30 cases (45,5%). From the 20 cases (30.3%) with suspicion of malignancy, only 6 had confirmed malign histology. Testicular ultrasound PPV for malignancy was 31%. CONCLUSION: In patients younger than 70 years the main orchiectomy's indication was suspect of malignancy and in older than 70, testicular inflammation. The germinal neoplasm was the predominant histology in younger than 70 years. In older than that, malignancy was infrequent. The positive predictive value of testicular ultrasound for malignancy decreased with patient's age. In patients older than 50 years proper image diagnosis to assess malignancy should be considered before orchiectomy is done.

Management of primary upper urinary tract carcinoma in situ diagnosed by ureteroscopic biopsy: Is bacillus Calmette-Guerin an alternative to nephroureterectomy?

BACKGROUND: Radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) represents the gold standard treatment for upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC); however, attempts have been made to treat upper urinary tract CIS (UT-CIS) conservatively. The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of patients with primary UT-CIS treated in our center by means of RNU vs. bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) instillations. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients with diagnosis of primary UT-CIS between 1990 and 2018. All patients had histological confirmation of UT-CIS in the absence of other concomitant UTUC. Histological confirmation was obtained by ureteroscopy with multiple biopsies. Patients were treated with BCG instillations, RNU or distal ureterectomy. Clinicopathological features and outcomes were compared between RNU and BCG groups. RESULTS: A total of 28 patients and 29 renal units (RUs) were included. Sixteen (57.1%) patients (17 RUs) received BCG. BCG was administered via nephrostomy tube in 4 patients, with a single-J ureteral stent in 5, and using a Double-J stent in 7. Complete response and persistence or recurrence were detected in ten (58.8%) and seven (41.2%) RUs treated with BCG, respectively. Eight (27.6%) RUs underwent RNU, and 4 (13.8%) Rus distal ureterectomy. No differences were found in recurrence-free survival (p=0.841) and cancer-specific survival (p=0.77) between the RNU and BCG groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although RNU remains the gold standard treatment for UT-CIS, our results confirm that BCG instillations are also effective. Histological confirmation of UT-CIS is mandatory before any treatment.

Carcinoma uretral primario: resultados de la experiencia de un único centro / Primary urethral carcinoma: Results from a single center experience

Introducción y objetivo El carcinoma primario de uretra (CPU) es una enfermedad neoplásica poco frecuente que surge en la uretra, sin evidencia de carcinoma previo o sincrónico en todo el tracto urinario. Dado que las enfermedades raras suelen diagnosticarse y tratarse de forma incorrecta, el objetivo de este estudio fue analizar la experiencia de un único centro urológico en el tratamiento del CPU, centrándose en las neoplasias que surgen de la uretra anterior masculina.Materiales y métodos Se revisaron retrospectivamente las historias clínicas de los pacientes con neoplasias a nivel de la uretra peneana y bulbar que se presentaron en nuestro centro terciario de referencia entre enero de 1988 y diciembre de 2018. Se excluyeron los pacientes con carcinoma de la uretra prostática. El diagnóstico se obtuvo con la ayuda de una uretroscopia y biopsia de la lesión. El estadio patológico local se evaluó mediante resonancia magnética nuclear (RMN) con contraste en pacientes seleccionados. El estadiaje se evaluó mediante examen clínico, ecografía y tomografía computarizada (TC). La cirugía radical (cistectomía radical + penectomía total + linfadenectomía inguinal bilateral) se propuso a los pacientes con tumores ≥ T2 o cN + con un buen estado funcional, tumor proximal y sin comorbilidades graves. En caso de afectación ganglionar, se ofreció adicionalmente quimioterapia neoadyuvante. Los pacientes con enfermedad localizada (< T2) y/o tumor más distal fueron sometidos a uretrectomía o penectomía parcial. Se evaluaron las curvas de Kaplan-Meier para el análisis de la supervivencia global (SG), la supervivencia cáncer específica (SCE) y la supervivencia libre de recidiva (SLR).Resultados Se estudiaron retrospectivamente un total de 13 pacientes varones con CPU anterior. Se realizó penectomía total en siete casos, mientras que cinco casos recibieron uretrectomía parcial y un caso, penectomía parcial. De los siete pacientes que se sometieron a una

Introduction and aim of the study Primary urethral carcinoma (PUC) is a rare neoplastic disease arising in the urethra, without any evidence of a previous or synchronous carcinoma of the entire urinary tract. Since rare diseases are often incorrectly diagnosed and managed, the aim of this study was to analyze the experience of a single urology center in the treatment of PUC, focusing on neoplasms arising from the male anterior urethra.Materials and methods Medical records of patients with neoplasms at the level of the penile and bulbar urethra who presented at our tertiary referral center between January 1988 and December 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with carcinoma of the prostatic urethra were excluded. The diagnosis was obtained with the aid of urethroscopy and lesion biopsy. Local staging was performed by means of contrast-enhanced MRI in selected patients. Staging was achieved by clinical examination, ultrasonography, and CT scan. Radical surgery (radical cystectomy + total penectomy + bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy) was proposed to patients with ≥T2 tumors or cN + with a good performance status, proximal tumor and without severe comorbidities. In case of nodal involvement, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was additionally offered. Patients with localized disease (ResultsA total of 13 male patients with anterior PUC were studied retrospectively. Total penectomy was performed in 7 cases, while partial urethrectomy was performed in 5 cases, and partial penectomy in 1 case. Of the 7 patients who underwent total penectomy, 5 underwent radical cystectomy with bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy. Three patients were treated with neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy, of which 2 were cT3N + and

Primary urethral carcinoma: Results from a single center experience.

INTRODUCTION AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Primary urethral carcinoma (PUC) is a rare neoplastic disease arising in the urethra, without any evidence of a previous or synchronous carcinoma of the entire urinary tract. Since rare diseases are often incorrectly diagnosed and managed, the aim of this study was to analyze the experience of a single urology center in the treatment of PUC, focusing on neoplasms arising from the male anterior urethra. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medical records of patients with neoplasms at the level of the penile and bulbar urethra who presented at our tertiary referral center between January 1988 and December 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with carcinoma of the prostatic urethra were excluded. The diagnosis was obtained with the aid of urethroscopy and lesion biopsy. Local staging was performed by means of contrast-enhanced MRI in selected patients. Staging was achieved by clinical examination, ultrasonography, and CT scan. Radical surgery (radical cystectomy + total penectomy + bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy) was proposed to patients with ≥T2 tumors or cN+ with a good performance status, proximal tumor and without severe comorbidities. In case of nodal involvement, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was additionally offered. Patients with localized disease (

Antecedentes de neoplasias urológicas previos al trasplante renal. Resultados oncológicos a largo plazo / History of urological malignancies before kidney transplantation, oncological outcome on the long term

Introducción: Nuestro objetivo ha sido informar de los resultados oncológicos de pacientes con ERET y antecedentes de neoplasias urológicas que fueron sometidos posteriormente a un trasplante renal (TR).Material y métodoEstudio retrospectivo llevado a cabo en el registro de la Fundación Puigvert (Barcelona) con 1.200 TR realizados entre 1988 y 2018. Se identificaron 85 neoplasias urológicas que recibieron tratamiento previo al TR en 81 pacientes: 15 (18%) cánceres de próstata, 49 (58%) carcinoma de células renales (CCR), 19 (22%) carcinomas uroteliales y 2 (2%) cánceres de testículo. Se registraron datos de las características basales, la estadificación del cáncer, el tratamiento y el seguimiento, y sobre la cronología del inicio de diálisis, la inscripción en la lista de espera y el TR. Los criterios de valoración fueron la recidiva del cáncer, la progresión metastásica, la muerte específica por cáncer y la supervivencia global.ResultadosEn una mediana de seguimiento de 13,1 años (2,2-32), se registraron 16/85 (19%) recidivas del cáncer, con 3 (4%) progresiones a metástasis y muerte por cáncer. La mediana de supervivencia global tras el tratamiento del cáncer fue de 25,3 años y la supervivencia por cáncer específica fue del 95% a los 25 años.La mediana de tiempo desde el tratamiento del cáncer hasta el trasplante de riñón fue de 4,8 años: 3,7 años en el cáncer de próstata, 3,9 años en el CCR y 8,8 años en el cáncer vesical. La mediana de tiempo desde el inicio de diálisis hasta el TR fue de 1,8 años en los pacientes con antecedentes de neoplasia urológica, frente a 0,5 años en la cohorte total de 1.200 trasplantes renales durante el mismo periodo. (AU)

Introduction: We aimed to report the oncological outcomes of ESRD patients with histories of urological malignancies who were subsequently submitted to kidney transplantation (KT).Material and methodRetrospective study lead in the Puigvert Foundation (Barcelona) registry of 1,200 KT performed from 1988 to 2018. Eighty-five urological malignancies that were treated before KT in 81 patients were identified: 15 (18%) prostate cancers, 49 (58%) RCC, 19 (22%) urothelial carcinomas and 2 (2%) testicular cancers. Baseline characteristics, cancer staging, treatment and follow-up were registered as well as the chronology of the start of dialysis, inscription on the waiting list and kidney transplantation. Endpoints included were cancer recurrence, metastatic progression, cancer-specific death and overall survival.ResultsIn a median follow-up of 13.1 years (2.2-32), 16/85 (19%) cancer recurrences were reported, with 3 (4%) who progressed to metastasis and died of cancer. Median overall survival after cancer treatment was 25.3 years and cancer-specific survival was 95% at 25 years.Median time from cancer treatment to kidney transplantation was 4.8 years: 3.7 years in prostate cancer, 3.9 years in RCC and 8.8 years in bladder cancer. The median time from start of dialysis to kidney transplantation was 1.8 years in patients with histories of urological malignancy versus 0.5 year in the total cohort of 1,200 renal transplanted over the same period. (AU)

History of urological malignancies before kidney transplantation, oncological outcome on the long term.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to report the oncological outcomes of ESRD patients with histories of urological malignancies who were subsequently submitted to kidney transplantation (KT). MATERIAL AND METHOD: Retrospective study lead in the Puigvert Foundation (Barcelona) registry of 1,200 KT performed from 1988 to 2018. Eighty-five urological malignancies that were treated before KT in 81 patients were identified: 15 (18%) prostate cancers, 49 (58%) RCC, 19 (22%) urothelial carcinomas and 2 (2%) testicular cancers. Baseline characteristics, cancer staging, treatment and follow-up were registered as well as the chronology of the start of dialysis, inscription on the waiting list and kidney transplantation. Endpoints included were cancer recurrence, metastatic progression, cancer-specific death and overall survival. RESULTS: In a median follow-up of 13.1 years (2.2-32), 16/85 (19%) cancer recurrences were reported, with 3 (4%) who progressed to metastasis and died of cancer. Median overall survival after cancer treatment was 25.3 years and cancer-specific survival was 95% at 25 years. Median time from cancer treatment to kidney transplantation was 4.8 years: 3.7 years in prostate cancer, 3.9 years in RCC and 8.8 years in bladder cancer. The median time from start of dialysis to kidney transplantation was 1.8 years in patients with histories of urological malignancy versus 0.5 year in the total cohort of 1,200 renal transplanted over the same period. CONCLUSIONS: Well-selected patients with histories of urological malignancies greatly benefit from kidney transplantation with infrequent and late cancer recurrence. Waiting time could be optimized in low-risk prostate cancer and RCC, but more robust data are needed.

Primary urethral carcinoma: Results from a single center experience. / Carcinoma uretral primario: resultados de la experiencia de un único centro.

INTRODUCTION AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Primary urethral carcinoma (PUC) is a rare neoplastic disease arising in the urethra, without any evidence of a previous or synchronous carcinoma of the entire urinary tract. Since rare diseases are often incorrectly diagnosed and managed, the aim of this study was to analyze the experience of a single urology center in the treatment of PUC, focusing on neoplasms arising from the male anterior urethra. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medical records of patients with neoplasms at the level of the penile and bulbar urethra who presented at our tertiary referral center between January 1988 and December 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with carcinoma of the prostatic urethra were excluded. The diagnosis was obtained with the aid of urethroscopy and lesion biopsy. Local staging was performed by means of contrast-enhanced MRI in selected patients. Staging was achieved by clinical examination, ultrasonography, and CT scan. Radical surgery (radical cystectomy + total penectomy + bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy) was proposed to patients with ≥T2 tumors or cN + with a good performance status, proximal tumor and without severe comorbidities. In case of nodal involvement, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was additionally offered. Patients with localized disease (

History of urological malignancies before kidney transplantation, oncological outcome on the long term. / Antecedentes de neoplasias urológicas previos al trasplante renal. Resultados oncológicos a largo plazo.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to report the oncological outcomes of ESRD patients with histories of urological malignancies who were subsequently submitted to kidney transplantation (KT). MATERIAL AND METHOD: Retrospective study lead in the Puigvert Foundation (Barcelona) registry of 1,200 KT performed from 1988 to 2018. Eighty-five urological malignancies that were treated before KT in 81 patients were identified: 15 (18%) prostate cancers, 49 (58%) RCC, 19 (22%) urothelial carcinomas and 2 (2%) testicular cancers. Baseline characteristics, cancer staging, treatment and follow-up were registered as well as the chronology of the start of dialysis, inscription on the waiting list and kidney transplantation. Endpoints included were cancer recurrence, metastatic progression, cancer-specific death and overall survival. RESULTS: In a median follow-up of 13.1 years (2.2-32), 16/85 (19%) cancer recurrences were reported, with 3 (4%) who progressed to metastasis and died of cancer. Median overall survival after cancer treatment was 25.3 years and cancer-specific survival was 95% at 25 years. Median time from cancer treatment to kidney transplantation was 4.8 years: 3.7 years in prostate cancer, 3.9 years in RCC and 8.8 years in bladder cancer. The median time from start of dialysis to kidney transplantation was 1.8 years in patients with histories of urological malignancy versus 0.5 year in the total cohort of 1,200 renal transplanted over the same period. CONCLUSIONS: Well-selected patients with histories of urological malignancies greatly benefit from kidney transplantation with infrequent and late cancer recurrence. Waiting time could be optimized in low-risk prostate cancer and RCC, but more robust data are needed.

Crioablación total o hemiglandular para el cáncer de próstata primario localizado: resultados oncológicos y funcionales a corto y medio plazo / Whole and hemi-gland cryoablation for primary localized prostate cancer: Short and medium-term oncological and functional outcomes

INTRODUCCIÓN: Comparar los resultados oncológicos, funcionales y postoperatorios de la crioablación hemiglandular (CH) vs. crioablación de toda la glándula (CT) como terapia primaria del cáncer de próstata localizado. MATERIAL Y MÉTODO: Se incluyeron 66 pacientes consecutivos tratados entre 2010 y 2018 con crioablación total (CT = 40) o crioablación hemiglandular (CH = 26) en un centro de referencia terciario. Todos los pacientes tenían cáncer de próstata de riesgo bajo-intermedio según criterios D'Amico. Se propuso crioablación hemiglandular en caso de cáncer de próstata unilateral comprobado por biopsia y RM. La variable principal de evaluación fue el fracaso de la crioterapia, para el que se consideraron y compararon tres definiciones: 1) fallo bioquímico (> PSA nadir + ≥ 2 ng/mL), 2) rebiopsia positiva de próstata Gleason ≥ 7, y 3) inicio de un tratamiento adicional para el cáncer de próstata. RESULTADOS: La edad media de los pacientes durante el tratamiento fue 74 [42-81] vs.76 [71-80] años en el grupo de CT vs. CH, respectivamente (p = 0,08). Los grupos de riesgo bajo e intermedio (D'Amico) fueron 15% y 85% frente a 23% y 77% (p = 0,75), respectivamente. El tiempo medio de seguimiento fue de 41 [1,5-99,0] vs.27 [0,9-93] meses (p = 0,03). La supervivencia libre de fracaso de la crioterapia a cuatro años en CT vs. CH fue de 69% vs.53% con la definición 1 (p = 0,24), 82% vs.80% con la definición 2 (p = 0,95), y 83% vs.77% con la definición 3 (p = 0,73). La continencia urinaria postoperatoria y al año fue de 60% y 83% en CT frente a 72% y 83% en CH (p = 0,26). La impotencia de novo tras la crioterapia fue del 75% frente al 46% (p = 0,33) en CT y CH, respectivamente. CONCLUSIONES: En nuestra cohorte de pacientes altamente seleccionados con CP unilateral de riesgo bajo-intermedio, la crioterapia hemiglandular puede proporcionar resultados oncológicos similares y menos complicaciones tempranas en comparación con la crioablación de toda la glándula

INTRODUCTION: To compare oncological, functional and post-operative outcomes of hemi (HC) vs. whole gland (WGC) cryoablation as first line treatment of localized prostate cancer. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Sixty-six consecutive patients undertaking whole-gland cryoablation (WGC = 40) or hemi-cryoablation (HC = 26) in a tertiary referral centre between 2010 and 2018 were included. All patients had a low-intermediate risk prostate cancer according to D'Amico risk classification. Hemi-ablation was proposed in case of biopsy and prostate MRI proven unilateral prostate cancer. Primary endpoint was Cryotherapy Failure for which 3 definitions were considered and compared: 1) biochemical failure (> PSA nadir+ ≥ 2 ng/mL), 2) positive prostate re-biopsy with Gleason score ≥ 7, 3) initiation of further prostate cancer treatment. RESULTS: Median patients age at treatment was 74 [42-81] vs.76 [71-80] years in WGC vs. HC group, respectively (p=.08). Low and intermediate D'Amico risk group were 15% and 85% vs.23% and 77% (p=.75), respectively. Median follow- up time was 41 [1.5-99.0] vs.27 [0.9-93] months (p=.03). Four-years cryotherapy failure free survival in WGC vs. HC were 69% vs.53% with definition 1 (p=.24), 82% vs.80% with definition 2 (p=.95), 83% vs.77% with definition 3 (p=.73). Early and 1-year urinary continence were 60% and 83% in WGC vs.72% and 83% in HC (p=.26). De novo impotency after cryotherapy was 75% vs.46% (p=.33) in WGC vs. HC. CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort of highly selected patients with unilateral low/intermediate risk PCa, hemi-cryoablation may provide similar oncological outcomes and less early complications compared to whole-gland cryoablation

Whole and hemi-gland cryoablation for primary localized prostate cancer: Short and medium-term oncological and functional outcomes. / Crioablación total o hemiglandular para el cáncer de próstata primario localizado: resultados oncológicos y funcionales a corto y medio plazo.

INTRODUCTION: To compare oncological, functional and post-operative outcomes of hemi (HC) vs. whole gland (WGC) cryoablation as first line treatment of localized prostate cancer. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Sixty-six consecutive patients undertaking whole-gland cryoablation (WGC=40) or hemi-cryoablation (HC=26) in a tertiary referral centre between 2010 and 2018 were included. All patients had a low-intermediate risk prostate cancer according to D'Amico risk classification. Hemi-ablation was proposed in case of biopsy and prostate MRI proven unilateral prostate cancer. Primary endpoint was Cryotherapy Failure for which 3 definitions were considered and compared: 1) biochemical failure (> PSA nadir+≥ 2 ng/mL), 2) positive prostate re-biopsy with Gleason score ≥ 7, 3) initiation of further prostate cancer treatment. RESULTS: Median patients age at treatment was 74 [42-81] vs. 76 [71-80] years in WGC vs. HC group, respectively (p=.08). Low and intermediate D'Amico risk group were 15% and 85% vs. 23% and 77% (p=.75), respectively. Median follow- up time was 41 [1.5-99.0] vs. 27 [0.9-93] months (p=.03). Four-years cryotherapy failure free survival in WGC vs. HC were 69% vs. 53% with definition 1 (p=.24), 82% vs. 80% with definition 2 (p=.95), 83% vs. 77% with definition 3 (p=.73). Early and 1-year urinary continence were 60% and 83% in WGC vs. 72% and 83% in HC (p=.26). De novo impotency after cryotherapy was 75% vs. 46% (p=.33) in WGC vs. HC. CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort of highly selected patients with unilateral low/intermediate risk PCa, hemi-cryoablation may provide similar oncological outcomes and less early complications compared to whole-gland cryoablation.