Isolated nerve palsy following insertion of a three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis.

Case report of a 57-year-old male who underwent insertion of an inflatable penile prosthesis due to erectile dysfunction, secondary to poorly controlled Type 2 diabetes and Peyronie's disease. The surgical procedure was uneventful and there were no immediate post-operative complications. During a routine follow-up, the patient described problems with the deflation of the implant and severe lower back and leg pain. Diagnostic MRI scans revealed reservoir migration, impingement of the obturator nerve and oedema in the adductor muscle group. The reservoir was initially repositioned, and later on removed due to ongoing symptoms.

Major Urological Cancer Surgery for Patients is Safe and Surgical Training Should Be Encouraged During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multicentre Analysis of 30-day Outcomes.

COVID-19 has resulted in the deferral of major surgery for genitourinary (GU) cancers with the exception of cancers with a high risk of progression. We report outcomes for major GU cancer operations, namely radical prostatectomy (RP), radical cystectomy (RC), radical nephrectomy (RN), partial nephrectomy (PN), and nephroureterectomy performed at 13 major GU cancer centres across the UK between March 1 and May 5, 2020. A total of 598 such operations were performed. Four patients (0.7%) developed COVID-19 postoperatively. There was no COVID-19-related mortality at 30 d. A minimally invasive approach was used in 499 cases (83.4%). A total of 228 cases (38.1%) were described as training procedures. Training case status was not associated with a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (p = 0.194) or hospital length of stay (LOS; p > 0.05 for all operation types). The risk of contracting COVID-19 was not associated with longer hospital LOS (p = 0.146), training case status (p = 0.588), higher ASA score (p = 0.295), or type of hospital site (p = 0.303). Our results suggest that major surgery for urological cancers remains safe and training should be encouraged during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic provided appropriate countermeasures are taken. These real-life data are important for policy-makers and clinicians when counselling patients during the current pandemic. PATIENT SUMMARY: We collected outcome data for major operations for prostate, bladder, and kidney cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic. These surgeries remain safe and training should be encouraged during the ongoing pandemic provided appropriate countermeasures are taken. Our real-life results are important for policy-makers and clinicians when counselling patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Comparison of Primary and Delayed Ureteroscopy for Ureteric Stones: A Prospective Non-Randomized Comparative Study.

BACKGROUND: Primary ureteroscopy (P-URS) has been shown to be as safe and as efficacious as preoperative stent insertion followed by a delayed ureteroscopy (D-URS). However, studies are of limited patient cohort. METHODS: A prospective study comparing P-URS and laser fragmentation for ureteric stones to those who received a stent insertion followed by D-URS and stone fragmentation. RESULTS: A total of 367 consecutive patients were included. P-URS was conducted on 235 patients and D-URS on 132 patients. There was no overall difference between patient or stone demographics between the 2 groups, although there were more proximal ureteric and pelvi-ureteric junction stones in the preoperative stent group. The mean operative times were comparable with a stone free rate of 97 and 94% in the preoperative stent and no-stent groups, respectively. The overall complication rates were comparable. CONCLUSION: The current study provides evidence for the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of P-URS for ureteric calculi in a publicly funded healthcare setting with results comparable to those patients with a preoperative stent and delayed procedure. Therefore, cumulatively, P-URS could lead to less hospitalization, length of stay, stent-related morbidity, and ultimately will be more cost-effective.

Lymph node dissection during nephroureterectomy: Establishing the existing evidence based on a review of the literature.

Objective: To determine the role of lymph node dissection (LND) in the treatment of upper tract transitional cell carcinoma (UTTCC), as the role of LND along with nephroureterectomy in treating UTTCC is unclear and several retrospective studies have been published on this topic with conflicting results. Methods: The Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), the Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials database (CENTRAL), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Clinicaltrials.gov, Google Scholar, and individual urological journals, were searched for all studies investigating the role of LND in the treatment of UTTCC. Of the studies identified, those that met inclusion criteria were included in this review. Results: In all, 27 studies were included in this review, with 9303 patients who underwent LND. No randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified. Tumours were located in the renal pelvis in 62% of patients, in the ureter in 35.5%, and multifocal in 2.3%. In total: 77.1% were LN-negative and 22.9% had LN metastasis. For all patients undergoing LND, the 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) rates were 27-65.4% and 32.3-95%, respectively. For patients who underwent a LND in accordance with a standardised anatomical template, the 5-year RFS and CSS rates were 84.3-93% and 83.5-94%, respectively. Conclusion: LND may provide a survival benefit in patients undergoing nephroureterectomy for UTTCC, particularly if following a standardised anatomical template and in those patients with muscle-invasive disease; however, a prospective RCT is required to confirm this. Abbreviations: CSS: cancer-specific survival; LN(D): lymph node (dissection); MeSH: Medical Subject Headings; OS: overall survival; pT: pathological T stage; RCT: randomised controlled trial; RFS: recurrence-free survival; UTTCC: upper tract TCC.

One-Stop Clinic Utilization in Plastic Surgery: Our Local Experience and the Results of a UK-Wide National Survey.

Introduction. "See and treat" one-stop clinics (OSCs) are an advocated NHS initiative to modernise care, reducing cancer treatment waiting times. Little studied in plastic surgery, the existing evidence suggests that though they improve care, they are rarely implemented. We present our experience setting up a plastic surgery OSC for minor skin surgery and survey their use across the UK. Methods. The OSC was evaluated by 18-week wait target compliance, measures of departmental capacity, and patient satisfaction. Data was obtained from 32 of the 47 UK plastic surgery departments to investigate the prevalence of OSCs for minor skin cancer surgery. Results. The OSC improved 18-week waiting times, from a noncompliant mean of 80% to a compliant 95% average. Department capacity increased 15%. 95% of patients were highly satisfied with and preferred the OSC to a conventional service. Only 25% of UK plastic surgery units run OSCs, offering varying reasons for not doing so, 42% having not considered their use. Conclusions. OSCs are underutilised within UK plastic surgery, where a significant proportion of units have not even considered their benefit. This is despite associated improvements in waiting times, department capacity, and levels of high patient satisfaction. We offer our considerations and local experience instituting an OSC service.