Ranking Important Factors for Using Postoperative Chemotherapy in Nonmuscle Invasive Bladder Cancer: Conjoint Analysis Results From the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC).

PURPOSE: National and international guidelines recommend the use of 1 dose of intravesical chemotherapy immediately following surgery for nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer, which is performed infrequently on a population level. We sought to understand the importance of potential environmental and clinical dimensions involved in the decision to offer this therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Urologists from the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) rated 8 distinct clinical vignettes involving patients with nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer. A ratings-based conjoint analysis method was used to evaluate the clinical vignette responses. Each vignette included 4 clinical dimensions and 2 environmental dimensions, with each dimension consisting of 2 possible attributes. The relative importance of each attribute was derived from the regression model and ranked in order. RESULTS: A total of 58 urologists answered the clinical vignettes which represents >75% of MUSIC sites. The median age of urologists was 53, most were male, and median years in practice was 20 years post residency. An environmental attribute, having a recovery room protocol for instilling and disposing of the chemotherapy, ranked as the most influential attribute for giving postoperative chemotherapy (utility=8.6). The clinical attribute yielding the strongest preference for giving chemotherapy was tumor grade (utility=4.9). These preferences varied by different subgroups of urologists, particularly regarding the type of practice a urologist was in. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that urologists have clear preferences for when they offer postoperative immediate chemotherapy. Factors beyond just clinical variables play a role in this decision making process such as the structure of the recovery room.

Vasectomy Reversal Online Marketing Practices: What Are We Putting Out There?

OBJECTIVE: To determine characteristics of providers marketing vasectomy reversal (VR) online, degree of information available online, the ease with which patients can compare providers, and the differences in VR practice patterns between academic and private practices. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified VR practices operating within the top 50 most populous metropolitan areas in the US. Practice websites were reviewed to obtain information such as provider educational background, level of magnification, ability to perform vasoepididymostomy, surgical volume, and cost. Based on information available, providers were assigned a novel REVERSAL score created by the authors. Descriptive statistics were used to compare results. RESULTS: Of the 107 providers identified (29 academic, 78 private), the majority were male urologists with a Doctor of Medicine degree. Academic providers were more likely to have fellowship training than private practice providers, 96.6 vs 43.6%, respectively (P = 0.00001). Compared to non-urologists, urologists were less likely to purchase online ads or disclose cost. Non-urologists charged significantly less than urologists, $3,584 ± 1,554 and $6,591 ± 1,518, respectively (P = 0.00001). Only one provider provided complete information as defined by REVERSAL score of 12, with the majority (61.7%) of providers achieving score ≤6. CONCLUSION: There is significant lack of transparency in publicly available information from VR practices. Practices should implement measures to improve dissemination of information to the public, so that patients can more easily compare providers and make informed decisions regarding VR.

Perceived barriers to the adoption of active surveillance in low-risk prostate cancer: a qualitative analysis of community and academic urologists.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines recommend active surveillance as the preferred treatment option for low-risk prostate cancer, but only a minority of eligible men receive active surveillance, and practice variation is substantial. The aim of this study is to describe barriers to urologists' recommendation of active surveillance in low-risk prostate cancer and explore variation of barriers by setting. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews among 22 practicing urologists, evenly distributed between academic and community practice. We coded barriers to active surveillance according to a conceptual model of determinants of treatment quality to identify potential opportunities for intervention. RESULTS: Community and academic urologists were generally in agreement on factors influencing active surveillance. Urologists perceived patient-level factors to have the greatest influence on recommendations, particularly tumor pathology, patient age, and judgements about the patient's ability to adhere to follow-up protocols. They also noted cross-cutting clinical barriers, including concerns about the adequacy of biopsy samples, inconsistent protocols to guide active surveillance, and side effects of biopsy procedures. Urologists had differing opinions on the impact of environmental factors, such as financial disincentives and fear of litigation. CONCLUSIONS: Despite national and international recommendations, both academic and community urologists note a variety of barriers to implementing active surveillance in low risk prostate cancer. These barriers will need to be specifically addressed in efforts to help urologists offer active surveillance more consistently.

Government Mandated Consent Dramatically Reduces Pediatric Urologist Opioid Utilization for Outpatient and Minor Emergency Surgeries.

PURPOSE: Postoperative opioids are overprescribed in the United States. In November 2016 the State of Pennsylvania required an opioid consent for minors. Our hypothesis is that this mandate decreased postoperative opioid prescriptions in our division. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients who received a urological outpatient or minor emergency procedure from August 2015 to August 2019 were identified. Surgeries performed within 6 months after mandate implementation were excluded to account for the transition period. Perioperative data including case type were extracted by a clinical data warehouse from preexisting fields within the health record. The frequencies of postoperative prescriptions, delayed prescriptions and emergency department encounters were assessed. A multivariable logistic regression to identify predictors of opioid prescription at discharge was performed. RESULTS: A total of 4,349 patients were analyzed. The frequency of postsurgical opioid prescriptions decreased from 45.3% to 2.6% (p <0.001). The median morphine milligram equivalent decreased by 22.5 among children prescribed an opioid (p <0.001). Rates of an emergency department visits (3% vs 2.7%) or delayed nonopioid prescriptions (0.8% vs 1.2%) within 30 days of discharge were unchanged (p >0.05). Fewer patients received a delayed opioid prescription after mandate implementation (0.03% vs 0.5%, p <0.001). Female patients were less likely (OR 0.309, 95% CI 0.195-0.491; p <0.001) to receive opioids prior to but not after the mandate (OR 0.309, 95% CI 0.544-2.035; p=0.122). Increasing age was predictive of receiving an opioid before (OR 1.187, 95% CI 1.157-1.218; p <0.001) and after (OR 1.241, 95% CI 1.186-1.299; p <0.001) the mandate. CONCLUSIONS: A state mandated opioid consent for minors greatly reduced post-urological surgery opioid prescription rates without increasing rates of readmission or delayed prescriptions.

A retrospective longitudinal evaluation of new overactive bladder patients in an FPMRS urologist practice: Are patients following up and utilizing third-line therapies?

AIMS: Third-line therapies are efficacious in improving overactive bladder (OAB) symptoms; however, OAB patients have poor follow-up and rarely progress to these therapies. Clinical care pathways (CCP) may improve OAB follow-up rates and third-line therapy use. We sought to determine how new OAB patients follow up and utilize third-line therapies with the implementation of an OAB CCP in a fellowship Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery (FPMRS) trained urologist's academic practice. METHODS: We identified new OAB patients using ICD-9 and 10 codes. They were placed into two groups: pre- and post-CCP use. Basic demographic data were collected. Patients were evaluated in a retrospective longitudinal fashion over 12 months to determine follow-up and third-line therapy utilization. RESULTS: A total of 769 new OAB patients (261 pre-CCP and 508 post-CCP) were identified. The mean number of follow-up visits increased significantly at 6 months (0.94 vs. 1.64 visits, p = .001) and 12 months (1.26 vs. 2.46 visits, p < .003). Follow-up rates increased significantly at 3 months (38.7% vs. 50.2%, p = .002). Mean time to third-line therapy decreased significantly (280 days vs. 160 days, p = .016). Third-line therapy utilization therapy rates increased at 6 months (7.7% vs. 13.4%, p = .018) and at 12 months (11.1% vs. 16.5%, p = .044). CONCLUSIONS: New OAB patients follow-up and progress to third-line therapies faster and more frequently with the use of a CCP in an FPMRS-trained urologist practice. However, many OAB patients still fail to follow up and overall utilization of third-line therapies remains low. Future studies are warranted to identify factors to why overall OAB compliance remains low.

Gynecologic Considerations for the Urologic Surgeon.

While gynecologic malignancy is uncommon in women with conditions such as pelvic organ prolapse and bladder cancer, urologists should be acquainted with the relevant gynecologic literature as it pertains to their surgical care of female patients. While taking the patient history, urologists should be aware of prior cervical cancer screening and ask about vaginal bleeding, which can be a sign of uterine cancer. Urologic surgeons should also discuss the role of concomitant prophylactic oophorectomy and/or salpingectomy for ovarian cancer risk reduction at the time of pelvic surgery. An understanding of basic tests, such as a transvaginal sonogram, can help urologists provide comprehensive care.

Knowledge and practice regarding prostate cancer germline testing among urologists: Gaps to address for optimal implementation✰,✰✰.

BACKGROUND: Germline testing is recommended for all men with metastatic prostate cancer (PCa), and for some with localized PCa meeting specific histologic or family history criteria. Germline genetic evaluation has important implications for PCa prognosis and management, as well as implications for family members and cancer screening. Despite the importance of germline evaluation, its utilization in urologic practice is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a 32-item survey of U.S. urologists to examine knowledge of germline testing guidelines and practice patterns. It was shared through email to 6 American Urological Association sections, the Veterans Affairs Urology Mailgroup, and social media. RESULTS: Among 132 total respondents from diverse practice settings across the U.S., 12% perform germline testing, 44% refer to a genetic counselor, 11% do both, and 33% do not test/refer. Only 4% had formal education in genetics. While 98% ask about PCa family history, only 76% and 52% ask about breast and ovarian cancer. When presented with hypothetical case scenarios where germline testing is indicated, many respondents indicated they would not offer genetic counseling or testing. Younger age (p = 0,03), academic practice (p = 0.04), and specializing in PCa/oncology (p = 0.007) were significantly associated with performing or referring for germline testing. Specializing in PCa/oncology was significantly associated with recommending germline testing for all case scenarios involving metastatic PCa (p = 0.0009) CONCLUSION: Our results suggest significant gaps in knowledge of germline testing and alignment of practice with national guidelines among urologists. Germline testing education and facilitation of genetic evaluation in urologic practice is warranted.

Being a Urologist on COVID-19 Pandemic Days.

...

Urologists and the Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): a Urologist's Perspective from China.

No need for letter to the editor.

Variations in Perioperative Antibiotic Prescriptions Among Academic Urologists After Ambulatory Endoscopic Urologic Surgery: Impact on Infection Rates and Validation of 2019 Best Practice Statement.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate adherence to the American Urologic Association (AUA) best practice statement guidelines regarding antibiotic duration in the perioperative setting for endoscopic urologic surgery. We assessed concordance to these guidelines among adult urologists at a single academic institution and its correlation with postoperative positive urine cultures as it relates to the revised 2019 best practice statement. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all adult endoscopic ambulatory urologic surgeries performed over an 18-month period by urologists at our institution. Patient demographics, pre- and postoperative urine cultures, operative details, stent or foley use, and antibiotic prescriptions were reviewed. Chi-squared and linear regression analyses were done. RESULTS: Three hundred thirty patients were included for analysis. Sixty-two percent of patients were prescribed postoperative antibiotics, for an average of 4 days. Trimethoprim/Sulfamethoxazole and fluroquinolones were most often prescribed (43% and 38%, respectively). Intraoperative stent placement, positive urine culture within 30 days prior to surgery, and a positive urine culture within 1 year prior to surgery predicted antibiotic prescription. No significant differences were seen in rates of positive postoperative urine culture rates between cohorts that received antibiotics postoperatively vs those who did not. CONCLUSIONS: At our academic institution, we observed poor concordance with the AUA best practice statement for perioperative antibiotic prescription after ambulatory endoscopic urologic surgery. Rates of positive postoperative cultures were low and not associated with receipt or duration of antibiotic prescription at the time of surgery, supporting minimal use of antibiotics for most endoscopic cases.

Cross-continental comparison of safety and protection measures amongst urologists during COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the well-being of urologists worldwide during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, and whether they have adequate personal protective equipment knowledge and supplies appropriate to their clinical setting. METHODS: Urologists worldwide completed a Société Internationale d'Urologie online survey from 16 April 2020 until 1 May 2020. Analysis was carried out to evaluate their knowledge about protecting themselves and others in the workplace, including their confidence in their ability to remain safe at work, and any regional differences. RESULTS: There were 3488 respondents from 109 countries. Urologists who stated they were moderately comfortable that their work environment offers good protection against coronavirus disease 2019 showed a total mean satisfaction level of 5.99 (on a "0 = not at all" to "10 = very" scale). A large majority (86.33%) were confident about protecting themselves from coronavirus disease 2019 at work. However, only about one-third reported their institution provided the required personal protective equipment (35.78%), and nearly half indicated their hospital has or had limited personal protective equipment availability (48.08%). Worldwide, a large majority of respondents answered affirmatively for testing the healthcare team (83.09%). Approximately half of the respondents (52.85%) across all regions indicated that all surgical team members face an equal risk of contracting coronavirus disease 2019 (52.85%). Nearly one-third of respondents reported that they had experienced social avoidance (28.97%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that urologists lack up-to-date knowledge of preferred protocols for personal protective equipment selection and use, social distancing, and coronavirus disease 2019 testing. These data can provide insights into functional domains from which other specialties could also benefit.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Urologist's clinical practice in Brazil: a management guideline proposal for low- and middle-income countries during the crisis period.

This letter to the Editor aims to provide suggestions and recommendations for the management of urological conditions in times of COVID-19 crisis in Brazil and other low- and middle-income countries. It is important to highlight that one of the main characteristics of this pandemic is the oversaturation of the health system capacity, mostly due to a high demand for personal protective equipment (PPE), Hospital/ICU beds, as well as ventilators. In places with limited resources and where the health care systems are already saturated, such consideration is even more worrisome. Therefore, most worldwide authorities are recommending to avoid, as much as possible, patient's elective visits to hospitals, as well as a judicious use of the operating room in order to mitigate the strain put on the health system. While efforts should be directed to the care of COVID-19 patients, other conditions (especially urgencies and oncological cases) must continue to be assisted. Thus, through a panel of experts, we have prepared a practical guide for Thus, through a panel of experts, we have prepared a practical guide for urologists based on the recommendations from the main Urologic Associations, as well as data from the literature to support the suggested management. We will try to follow the standard guideline recommendations from the American Urological Association (AUA) and European Association of Urology (EAU), with the aim of pursuing the best outcomes possible. However, some recommendations were based on the consensus of the panel, taking into consideration the reality of developing countries and the unprecedented situation caused by the COVID-19 crisis. Most importantly, all recommendations on this manuscript are based on the expectancy of a maximum 3-month duration of the crisis. If this period shall extended, these recommendations will be revised and updated.

Prostate biopsy techniques and pre-biopsy prophylactic measures: variation in current practice patterns in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: The clinical landscape of prostate biopsy (PB) is evolving with changes in procedures and techniques. Moreover, antibiotic resistance is increasing and influences the efficacy of pre-biopsy prophylactic regimens. Therefore, increasing antibiotic resistance may impact on clinical care, which probably results in differences between hospitals. The objective of our study is to determine the (variability in) current practices of PB in the Netherlands and to gain insight into Dutch urologists' perceptions of fluoroquinolone resistance and biopsy related infections. METHODS: An online questionnaire was prepared using SurveyMonkey® platform and distributed to all 420 members of the Dutch Association of Urology, who work in 81 Dutch hospitals. Information about PB techniques and periprocedural antimicrobial prophylaxis was collected. Urologists' perceptions regarding pre-biopsy antibiotic prophylaxis in an era of antibiotic resistance was assessed. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-one responses (38.3%) were analyzed representing 65 (80.3%) of all Dutch hospitals performing PB. Transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy (TRUSPB) was performed in 64 (98.5%) hospitals. 43.1% of the hospitals (also) used other image-guided biopsy techniques. Twenty-three different empirical prophylactic regimens were reported among the hospitals. Ciprofloxacin was most commonly prescribed (84.4%). The duration ranged from one pre-biopsy dose (59.4%) to 5 days extended prophylaxis. 25.2% of the urologists experienced ciprofloxacin resistance as a current problem in the prevention of biopsy related infections and 73.6% as a future problem. CONCLUSIONS: There is a wide variation in practice patterns among Dutch urologists. TRUSPB is the most commonly used biopsy technique, but other image-guided biopsy techniques are increasingly used. Antimicrobial prophylaxis is not standardized and prolonged prophylaxis is common. The wide variation in practice patterns and lack of standardization underlines the need for evidence-based recommendations to guide urologists in choosing appropriate antimicrobial prophylaxis for PB in the context of increasing antibiotic resistance.

National opioid prescription patterns and patient usage after routine vasectomy.

Routine prescription of opioids after outpatient surgery is common. The main objective of this study was to determine urologist opioid prescribing patterns and patients' pain control medication regimens (opioid and anti-inflammatory) after vasectomy. We designed an anonymous seven-question electronic survey of urologists to assess vasectomy practice and post-vasectomy opioid prescriptions using the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile database. We then performed a retrospective internal telephone survey of men who had undergone vasectomy by a single surgeon (MKS). This telephone survey queried men about opioid prescription filling, opioid use and ibuprofen use. We received 136 (4.5%) electronic survey responses. 51.5% of urologists routinely prescribed opioids for post-vasectomy analgesia, despite 50.4% having 'no idea' how many patients actually used these. On internal telephone survey, 52.6% of patients who used opioids reported using ibuprofen as their primary pain medication, versus 92.6% of patients who did not use opioids (p = .004). Ibuprofen use was associated with using fewer opioid tablets (p = .003). Using ≥1 opioid tab was associated with increased odds of not using ibuprofen as the primary pain medication (OR 11.2, 95% CI 2.39-83.0, p = .005). In conclusion, integration of practice guidelines may help standardise and minimise potentially unnecessary post-vasectomy opioid prescriptions.

Performance Optimization Strategies for Complex Endourologic Procedures.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and address factors that may impact a surgeon's performance during endourologic procedures. METHODS: A literature review was performed for articles focusing on surgical ergonomics, education, sports and performance psychology. RESULTS: As urologists and trainees have become more comfortable approaching complex pathology endoscopically, there remains an opportunity to refine surgeon-related factors and optimize extrinsic factors to maximize efficiency and provide patients with the highest quality outcomes and safety. CONCLUSION: Medical centers and training programs should strive to include formal lessons on stress-coping mechanisms, communication, and dedicated ergonomic training, as these all play a role in physician well-being and may lead to improved clinical outcomes.

Antegrade pyelography, a survey among urologists.

PURPOSE: Antegrade pyelography (APG) is a useful modality for imaging the upper urinary tract. Little scientific evidence exists concerning optimal pressure while performing an APG. Methods of implementation seem to vary between hospitals as no specific guideline exists. Our aim was to describe current practice patterns in pre-procedural prophylaxis, describe methods of contrast administration, and estimate rate of complications during APG as reported by urologist, in order to stimulate discussion on defining guidelines. METHODS: A digital questionnaire with 16 questions concerning APG was set out among EAU members via an ESUI twitter link. Fifty urologists from different centers responded. Outcomes were use of antibiotics, used pressure in upper urinary tract, and estimated urosepsis prevalence. Percentages and confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated. RESULTS: Forty-two percent (95% CI 30-56) of respondents stated that antibiotic prophylaxis was always administered. Fifty-two percent (95% CI 38-65) of urologists sometimes performed a pre-procedural culture. Seventy percent (95% CI 56-81) indicated that administration of contrast during APG was performed using a syringe. A local guideline was only used in 8% of cases (95% CI 2.8-17.9) The self-estimated average percentage of urosepsis as a result of performing an APG was mentioned to be 4% (range 0-20%). CONCLUSION: Despite a considerable risk of urosepsis, no guideline or consensus exists on how to perform APG. This is urgently needed in order to prevent complications. Low response rate is a major limitation of these findings.

Testicular torsion treatment: the horns of a dilemma?

INTRODUCTION: Testicular torsion treatment rests on the horns of a dilemma, with widespread national variation in whether the responsible surgical specialty is general surgery or urology, even in hospitals with both general surgery and urology emergency service assets. This study aimed to quantify higher surgical trainee operative experience and confidence in managing suspected testicular torsion in a single UK deanery (Wales). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Anonymised logbook data were obtained via the Intercollegiate Surgical Curriculum Programme version 10 using the head of school report function for all general surgery (n=53) and urology (n=15) higher surgical trainees, which were combined with the distribution of an electronic self-administered questionnaire. RESULTS: Median operative scrotal explorations recorded for all general surgery higher surgical trainees and senior general surgery higher surgical trainees (ST7+) was 7 (range 1-22) and 10 (range 1-22), compared with 21 (range 9-64, p=0.00104) and 24 (19-64, p<0.001) for urology higher surgical trainees. The questionnaire response rate was 64.6% (general surgery 31/50, urology 11/15). Confidence levels in assessing adult and paediatric patients were lower in general surgery when compared with urology higher surgical trainees: median adult confidence rate 7/10 compared with 9/10, and paediatric confidence rate 7/10 compared with 8/10 (p<0.001 and p=0.053, respectively). All higher surgical trainees preferred urology as the accountable hospital specialty when both assets were available. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: General surgery higher surgical trainees receive less than 50% of the operative exposure of urology higher surgical trainees in emergency scrotal surgery, which has important implications for curriculum competence development and patient safety.

A census of laparoscopic and robotic urological practice: a survey of minimally invasive surgery department of the Brazilian Society of Urology

ABSTRACT Minimally invasive urologic surgery has been developing in Brazil and now is a routine part of care in many regions and patients with different conditions benefit from it. Training in laparoscopic and robotic surgery has evolved and concerns exist both over the quality of surgical training and the practical effect on results of the urological training. This is an unprecedented study which undertook a census to determinate the current state of laparoscopic and robotic urological practice and to know the mains barriers to adequate practice in Brazil. In august 2017, surveys, consisting of an anonymous questionnaire with 15 questions, were sent via internet to the mailing list of the Brazilian Society of Urology (SBU). With these data, activities related to laparoscopy and robotic surgery of our urologists and the mains difficulties and barriers to practice laparoscopy and robotic surgery were evaluated. In our survey, 413 questionnaires were completed. Majority of the responders were currently working in the southeast region of Brazil (52.1%) and 75.5% of the surgeons performed laparoscopic surgery while, only 12.8%, robotic surgery. The lack of experience on the technique and the lack of equipment were the mains barriers and difficulties for not executing laparoscopic and robotic surgeries, respectively. Proper longitudinal training and access to good equipment in minimally invasive surgery are still barriers for urologists in our country.