Who Are the Mentors of the Future Endourologist? An Analysis of Endourological Society Program Directors.

Introduction: Surgical training programs are pivotal in shaping skilled and compassionate surgeons, with mentors playing a crucial role in instilling clinical competence and essential attributes. This study aims to describe the characteristics of the program directors of Endourological Society-accredited fellowship programs. Methodology: The Endourological Society's website was used to identify program directors. The following data points were extracted: year of graduation from medical school, year of completing residency, if they had attended fellowship training or held additional degrees such as (PhD, MS, MBA, MSc, etc.), and number of publications on Scopus. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. Results: A total of 84 fellowship programs and 115 program directors were identified. Geographically, 77.4% (n = 65) were in North America, 8.3% (n = 7) in Asia, 8.3% (n = 7) in the Middle East, 3.6% (n = 3) in Europe, and 2.4% (n = 2) in South America. Of the 115 program directors, 94.8% were male, and only 5.2% were female. Program directors graduated medical school with a median year of 1998 (1966-2015). Eighty percent attended fellowship programs, and 19.1% held additional degrees (PhD, MS, MBA, MSc, etc.). The median number of publications was 79 (4-1963), with a median citation of 1607 (1-43,565). The median H-index was 23 (range: 1-110). Conclusion: Most program directors of Endourological Society-accredited fellowship programs are fellowship-trained and a notable number held a second degree. However, a pronounced gender disparity is observed, with limited female representation among program directors. This assessment contributes valuable insights into the urology and endourology mentorship, emphasizing the need for broader diversity and inclusivity in leadership roles.

Single-Port vs Multiport Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy: A Meta-Analysis.

Background: Several centers have reported their experience with single-port robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (SP-RAPN); however, it is uncertain if utilization of this platform represents an improvement in outcomes compared to multiport robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (MP-RAPN). To evaluate this, we performed a meta-analysis to compare the perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes between SP-RAPN and MP-RAPN. Methods: For relevant articles, three electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, were searched from their inception until January 1, 2023. A meta-analysis has been reported in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 and assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews (AMSTAR) guidelines. The odds ratio (OR) and weighted mean difference (MD) were applied for the comparison of dichotomous and continuous variables with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Of the 374 retrieved abstracts, 29 underwent full-text review, and 8 studies were included in the final analysis, comprising a total cohort of 1007 cases of RAPN (453 SP-RAPN cases and 554 MP-RAPN cases). Compared to MP-RAPN, the SP-RAPN group had a significantly longer ischemia time (MD = 4.6 minutes, 95% CI 2.8 to 6.3, p < 0.001), less estimated blood loss (MD = -12.4 mL, 95% CI -24.6 to -0.3, p = 0.045), higher blood transfusion rate (OR = 2.97, 95% CI 1.33 to 6.65, p = 0.008), and higher postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at 6 months (MD = 4.9 mL/min, 95% CI 0.2 to 9.7, p = 0.04). There was no significant difference in other outcomes between the two approaches, including the intraoperative complication, overall postoperative complication, minor postoperative complication (Clavien-Dindo I - II), major postoperative complication (Clavien-Dindo III-V), conversion to radical nephrectomy, pain score on day #1, pain score on discharge, morphine milligram equivalent usage, hospital stay, positive surgical margins, and postoperative eGFR. Conclusions: SP-RAPN represents an emerging technique using a novel platform. Initial studies have demonstrated that SP-RAPN is a safe and feasible approach to performing partial nephrectomy, although with inferior outcomes for ischemia time and blood transfusion rates. Further studies will be necessary to define the best usage of SP-RAPN within the surgeon's armamentarium.