A systematic review of supervised comprehensive functional physiotherapy after radical prostatectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Radical prostatectomy (RP) can generate multidimensional physiological changes, like decrease in physical and emotional functioning, as well as Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL). However, only pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is commonly recommended as conservative treatment after RP. More comprehensive interventions than only PFMT, such as physiotherapy promoting general coordination, flexibility, strength, endurance, fitness and functional capacity may seem more relevant and patient-centered. AIM OF THE REVIEW: Our aim was to evaluate whether a more Comprehensive Functional Physical Therapy (CFPT) than PFMT alone, focused on lower limb and lumbo-pelvic exercises, would improve physical capacities and functions (including urinary continence (UI)), emotional functions and HRQoL in patients after RP. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA reporting guidelines. A literature search was conducted in PubMed, PEDro, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases from inception to January 2022. The PICO approach was used to determine the eligibility criteria. According to the quality of selected studies, levels of evidence were given. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Eight clinical trials met the eligibility criteria. Regarding UI, all the studies reported positive outcomes for CFPT between pre- and post-physiotherapy (P<0.05). The selected studies reported positive outcomes for physical capacities as well as for physical and emotional functioning, and for HRQoL (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Current literature indicates that CFPT was shown to be safe, non-invasive, and particularly effective in terms of UI recovery. CFPT could result in more positive outcomes, including physical capacities, physical and emotional functioning and HRQoL, than PFMT alone. Further standardized, physiotherapist-guided and well-designed clinical trials conducted by experienced multidisciplinary clinicians are still called for.

French AFU Cancer Committee Guidelines - Update 2022-2024: management of kidney cancer.

AIM: To update the recommendations for the management of kidney cancers. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted from 2015 to 2022. The most relevant articles on the diagnosis, classification, surgical treatment, medical treatment and follow-up of kidney cancer were selected and incorporated into the recommendations. Therefore, the recommendations were updated while specifying the level of evidence (high or low). RESULTS: The gold standard for the diagnosis and evaluation of kidney cancer is contrast-enhanced chest and abdominal CT. MRI and contrast-enhanced ultrasound are indicated in special cases. Percutaneous biopsy is recommended in situations where the results will influence the therapeutic decision. Renal tumours should be classified according to the pTNM 2017 classification, the WHO 2022 classification and the ISUP nucleolar grade. Metastatic kidney cancer should be classified according to the IMDC criteria. Partial nephrectomy is the gold standard treatment for T1a tumours and can be performed by an open approach, by laparoscopy or by robot-guidance. Active surveillance of tumours less than 2cm in size can be considered regardless of the patient's age. Ablative therapies and active surveillance are options in elderly patients with comorbidity. T1b tumours should be treated by partial or radical nephrectomy depending on the complexity of the tumour. Radical nephrectomy is the first-line treatment for locally advanced cancers. Adjuvant treatment with pembrolizumab should be considered in patients at intermediate and high risk for recurrence after nephrectomy. In metastatic patients: Immediate cytoreductive nephrectomy may be offered to oligometastatic patients in combination with local treatment of metastases if this can be complete and delayed cytoreductive nephrectomy can be proposed for patients with a complete response or a significant partial response. Medical treatment should be proposed as first-line therapy for patients with a poor or intermediate prognosis. Surgical or local treatment of metastases can be proposed in case of single or oligo-metastases. The recommended first-line drugs for metastatic patients with clear cell renal carcinoma are the combinations axitinib/pembrolizumab, nivolumab/ipililumab, nivolumab/cabozantinib and lenvatinib/pembrolizumab. Cabozantinib is the recommended first-line treatment for patients with metastatic papillary carcinoma. Cystic tumours should be classified according to the Bosniak classification. Surgical removal should be proposed as a priority for Bosniak III and IV lesions. It is recommended that patient monitoring be adapted to the aggressiveness of the tumour. CONCLUSION: These updated recommendations are a reference that will allow French and French-speaking practitioners to improve kidney cancer management.

[BCG strain shortage from 2012 to 2014: Evaluation of its impact on the management of patients with high-risk NMIBC]. / Pénurie en souche de BCG entre 2012 et 2014 : évaluation de son impact sur la prise en charge des patients présentant une TVNIM de haut risque.

INTRODUCTION: BCG instillations are the gold-standard treatment for high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) with a decreased risk of tumor recurrence and muscle infiltration. From 2012 to 2014, a stock shortage of the Connaught strain has led to the cessation of supply for immucyst in France. The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential impact of BCG shortage on the management of patients with NMIBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective single-center study including patients followed from May 2005 to May 2015 with a high-risk NMIBC (primo-diagnosis). Patients were separated into two groups: not impacted by the shortage (NISG: 56 patients) and impacted by the shortage (ISG: 53 patients). Data on tumour recurrence (RFS), muscle progression (PFS) and overall and specific survival (OS and SS) were also analysed. RESULTS: The BCG induction schedule could not be carried out in 20.8% of cases in the ISG compared to only 5.3% of cases in NISG (P=0.02). Similarly, the maintenance treatment was incomplete for 56.6% of cases versus 37.5% in NISG (P=0.047). Nevertheless, it should be underlined that very high-risk NMIBC received a complete induction BCG schedule. The ISG seems to have benefited with the evolution of the guidelines with the use of diagnosis bladder fluorescence but without significant difference on the rate of second look bladder trans-uretral resection. The cystectomy rate was higher in ISG. No significant difference in RFS, PFS, OS, and SS between the two groups. CONCLUSION: In our experience, RFS, PFS, OS or SS were not impacted by the BCG shortage. These data may be explained by a better selection of very high-risk patients including the recommended BCG schedule and more frequently the use of diagnosis bladder fluorescence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Is intraoperative heparin during renal transplantation useful to reduce graft vascular thrombosis?

OBJECTIVES: The standard treatment for end-stage renal disease is renal transplantation. As vascular anastomoses are performed during the surgery, it may expose to a risk of vascular thrombosis. This raises the question of using intravenous heparin during the procedure. The purpose of this study was to compare the incidence of renal transplant vascular thrombosis in the perioperative period based on whether the patients received or not intraoperative heparin. METHODS: A single center retrospective study was conducted on a cohort of consecutive patients who underwent renal transplantation between 2011 and 2015. Patients were divided into two groups: patients not receiving heparin vs. receiving heparin at the dose of 0.5mg/kg. A Doppler ultrasound was performed at day one postoperatively to assess the occurrence of vascular thrombosis. Hemorrhagic complications and the need for postoperative transfusion were also assessed. RESULTS: In total, 261 patients were included. Fifty-one patients received heparin (19.5%). Patient's baseline characteristics were comparable between the groups. No significant difference was found regarding the incidence of vascular thrombosis (6% for both groups, P=1). In addition, no difference was found regarding hemorrhagic complications requiring surgical revision (P=1) as well as early postoperative transfusion rate (P=0.57). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that intraoperative IV heparin doesn't improve the risk of vascular thrombosis following renal transplantation. However, intraoperative IV heparin was not significantly associated with a higher rate of hemorrhagic complications suggesting that heparin can be safely used if required in some selected patients at higher risk of thrombosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

[French ccAFU guidelines - update 2020-2022: management of kidney cancer]. / Recommandations françaises du Comité de cancérologie de l'AFU ­ actualisation 2020­2022 : prise en charge du cancer du rein.

OBJECTIVE: - To update the French guidelines on kidney cancer. METHODS: - A systematic review of the literature between 2015 and 2020 was performed. The most relevant articles regarding the diagnosis, the classification, surgical treatment, medical treatment and follow-up of kidney cancer were retrieved and included in the new guidelines. The guidelines were updated with corresponding levels of evidence. RESULTS: - Thoraco-abdominal CT scan with injection is the best radiological exam for the diagnosis of kidney cancer. MRI and contrast ultra-sound can be useful in some cases. Percutaneous biopsy is recommended when histological results will affect clinical decision. Renal tumours must be classified according to pTNM 2017 classification and ISUP grade. Metastatic kidney cancers must be classified according to IMDC criteria. Partial nephrectomy is the recommended treatment for T1a tumours and can be done through an open, laparoscopic or robotic access. T1b tumours can be treated by partial or total nephrectomy according to tumour complexity. Radical nephrectomy is the recommended treatment of advanced localized tumours. There is no recommended adjuvant treatment. In metastatic patients: cyto-reductive nephrectomy can be offered in case of good prognosis; medical treatment must be counseled first in case of intermediate or bad prognosis. Surgical or local treatment of metastases should be considered in case of solitary lesion or oligo-metastases. First line recommended drugs in metastatic patients include the associations axitinib/pembrolizumab and nivolumab/ipilimumab. Cystic tumours must be classified according to Bosniak Classification. Surgical excision should be offered to patients with Bosniak III and IV lesions. It is recommended to follow patients clinically and with imaging according to tumour aggressiveness. CONCLUSION: - These updated recommendations should assist French speaking urologists for their management of kidney cancers.

[Renal Trauma]. / Traumatismes du rein.

INTRODUCTION: Renal traumas are common, observed in 10% of patients with abdominal trauma. Most renal traumas are blunt, resulting from a direct hit or from an abrupt deceleration. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We realized a synthesis of renal trauma management for nurses. RESULTS: Clinical presentation often encompasses gross hematuria and lumbar pain. The best diagnostic tool is computed tomography (CT) urogram. Based on CT urogram images, renal traumas are classified according to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) classification in five grades of increasing severity. The management is conservative in the vast majority of cases and has been largely simplified over the past few years, being now mostly based on observation. Radiological interventional and endoscopic procedures are used only in very selected cases and surgical exploration has become extremely rare. CONCLUSION: The prognosis has also considerably improved and renal trauma rarely result in death or loss of the kidney nowadays.

RETRACTED: Recommandations françaises du Comité de Cancérologie de l'AFU ­ Actualisation 2018­2020 : prise en charge du cancer du reinFrench ccAFU guidelines ­ Update 2018­2020: Management of kidney cancer / Recommandations françaises du Comité de Cancérologie de l'AFU ­ Actualisation 2018­2020 : prise en charge du cancer du rein.

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy). Cet article est retiré de la publication à la demande des auteurs car ils ont apporté des modifications significatives sur des points scientifiques après la publication de la première version des recommandations. Le nouvel article est disponible à cette adresse: DOI:10.1016/j.purol.2019.01.004. C'est cette nouvelle version qui doit être utilisée pour citer l'article. This article has been retracted at the request of the authors, as it is not based on the definitive version of the text because some scientific data has been corrected since the first issue was published. The replacement has been published at the DOI:10.1016/j.purol.2019.01.004. That newer version of the text should be used when citing the article.

[French ccAFU guidelines - Update 2018-2020: Management of kidney cancer]. / Recommandations françaises du Comité de Cancérologie de l'AFU ­ Actualisation 2018­2020 : prise en charge du cancer du rein.

OBJECTIVE: To update the French guidelines on kidney cancer. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature between 2015 and 2018 was performed. The most relevant articles regarding the diagnosis, the classification, surgical treatment, medical treatment and follow-up of kidney cancer were retrieved and included in the new guidelines. The guidelines were updated with corresponding levels of evidence. RESULTS: Thoraco-abdominal CT scan with injection is the best radiological exam for the diagnosis of kidney cancer. MRI and contrast ultrasound can be useful in some cases. Percutaneous biopsy is recommended when histological results will affect clinical decision. Renal tumours must be classified according to pTNM 2017 classification and ISUP grade. Metastatic kidney cancers must be classified according to IMDC criteria. Partial nephrectomy is the recommended treatment for T1a tumours and can be done through an open, laparoscopic or robotic access. T1b tumours can be treated by partial or total nephrectomy according to tumour complexity. Radical nephrectomy is the recommended treatment of advanced localized tumours. In metastatic patients: cytoreductive nephrectomy is recommended in case of good prognosis; medical treatment must be offered first in case of intermediate or bad prognosis. Surgical or local treatment of metastases should be considered in case of solitary lesion or oligo-metastases. First-line recommended drugs in metastatic patients include sunitinib, pazopanib, and the association nivolumab/ipilimumab. Cabozantinib can be offered in option in intermediate and bad prognostic patients. Cystic tumours must be classified according to Bosniak Classification. Surgical excision should be offered to patients with Bosniak III and IV lesions. It is recommended to follow patients clinically and with imaging according to tumour aggressiveness. CONCLUSION: These updated recommendations should assist French speaking urologists for their management of kidney cancers.

Overall survival and oncological outcomes after partial nephrectomy and radical nephrectomy for cT2a renal tumors: A collaborative international study from the French kidney cancer research network UroCCR.

BACKGROUND: Partial nephrectomy (PN) is recommended as first-line treatment for cT1 stage kidney tumors because of a better renal function and probably a better overall survival than radical nephrectomy (RN). For larger tumors, PN has a controversial position due to lack of evidence showing good cancer control. The aim of this study was to compare the results of PN and RN in cT2a stage on overall survival and oncological results. METHOD: A retrospective international multicenter study was conducted in the frame of the French kidney cancer research network (UroCCR). We considered all patients aged≥18 years who underwent surgical treatment for localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC) stage cT2a (7.1-10cm) between 2000 and 2014. Cox and Fine-Gray models were performed to analyze overall survival (OS), cancer specific survival (CSS) and cancer-free survival (CFS). Comparison between PN and RN was realized after an adjustment by propensity score considering predefined confounding factors: age, sex, tumor size, pT stage of the TNM classification, histological type, ISUP grade, ASA score. RESULTS: A total of 267 patients were included. OS at 3 and 5 years was 93.6% and 78.7% after PN and 88.0% and 76.2% after RN, respectively. CSS at 3 and 5 years was 95.4% and 80.2% after PN and 91.0% and 85.0% after RN. No significant difference between groups was found after propensity score adjustment for OS (HR 0.87, 95% CI: 0.37-2.05, P=0.75), CSS (HR 0.52, 95% CI: 0.18-1.54, P=0.24) and CFS (HR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.50-2.09, P=0.96). CONCLUSION: PN seems equivalent to RN for OS, CSS and CFS in cT2a stage kidney tumors. The risk of recurrence is probably more related to prognostic factors than the surgical technique. The decision to perform a PN should depend on technical feasibility rather than tumor size, both to imperative and elective situation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Sequential treatment with ProACT™ device implantation after male sling failure for male urinary incontinence.

OBJECTIVES: There is no strong evidence for second line therapy after male sling failure for post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPUI). We report the outcomes after periurethral balloons implantation for persistence or recurrence of mild PPI symptoms after male sling implantation. METHODS: All patients implanted of a ProACT™ device (Uromedica, Inc., MN, USA) following I-STOP transobturator male sling (TOMS) failure, in a tertiary reference center between 2009 and 2016, were included. Patients were evaluated by 24-hour pad-test before and after implantation, and after each balloon repressurizing procedure. PGI-I and Likert scale patient satisfaction were estimated during a telephone interview conducted in 2016. Objective and subjective cure of urinary incontinence were defined by a 24-hour pad-test<8g and the use of zero or one pad per day, respectively. RESULTS: Fourteen patients were included. Median follow-up was 34months [4-89]. Objective and subjective cure were 29% (n=4) and 57% (n=8), respectively. Median pad-test decreased from 95g [IQR: 130] to 34g [IQR: 83] (P=0.022). ProACT™ significantly decreased median pad-test by a factor 2.73 [1.19-6.29]. Eighty-eight percent patients were feeling a little better, much better or very much better and 77% were satisfied or very satisfied at the end of follow-up. Reoperation rate was 28% (n=4): 3 balloons were changed for caudally migration (n=2) or deflation (n=1) and 1 had a urinary sphincter implanted for severe UI. CONCLUSIONS: ProACT™ is a safe and efficient treatment that can be used in second line therapy after TOMS failure for PPUI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

[Interest of surgical companionship during the training period of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy]. / Intérêt du compagnonnage chirurgical durant la période d'apprentissage de la prostatectomie radicale robot-assistée.

OBJECTIVE: Study of the learning curve of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, evaluating intraoperative difficulties and postoperative complications according to Clavien-Dindo classification. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective study of our first 157 consecutive patients treated with robot-assisted prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer between September 2011 and December 2014. Comparison of learning for each group of 50 procedures and then comparison between patients operated on by a pair of two seniors specially trained for robotic surgery and patients operated on by one mixed pair including a surgeon junior coached by one senior of the first group. RESULTS: Only postoperative complications decreased significantly from the 51st patient (P=0.04). The curves showing the evolution of the operative time decreased with a parallel trend between the two pairs, but with more variability in the mixed pair. There was no significant difference in terms of intraoperative difficulties (P=0.59), nor postoperative complications (P=0.56) mainly of grade 2. The blood loss, transfusion rate, duration of hospitalization and readmission rates did not differ. Lymph node dissection did not affect outcomes. For oncological results, the overall rate of positive surgical margins (R+) was 30.6 % in the initial pair against 24.2 % in the mixed group with no significant difference. Nevertheless, the subpopulation study objectified a R+ rate of 12.86 % for pT2 against 42.85 % for pT3. CONCLUSION: The early involvement of a junior surgeon who did not receive specific training, but benefiting from the guidance of a senior surgeon, did not compromise the results while allowing a faster learning curve with a rate of operative complications close to the one observed by the senior pair. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Long-term outcomes of I-Stop TOMS™ male sling implantation for post-prostatectomy incontinence management.

OBJECTIVES: To report long-term outcomes after I-Stop TOMS™ implantation for PPI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective evaluation was conducted in three tertiary reference centers. All consecutive patients implanted with an I-Stop TOMS™ sling between 2007 and 2012 for mild to moderate PPI (24-hour Pad test<400g) without history of pelvic radiation therapy were included. Evaluation had been conducted preoperatively, at one and six months postoperative and yearly thereafter. The main outcome criterion was the number of pads per day. Secondary criteria were International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire (ICIQ), SF-36 questionnaire, and complications. RESULTS: A hundred patients were evaluated with a median follow-up of 58months [19-78]. Pad use was significantly reduced and quality of life improved at last follow-up (P<0.0001). The percentage of patients dry and socially continent (0 or 1 pad) were 40% and 77% at 1 year, then dropped to 15% and 22%, respectively after 5years. Twelve patients were treated by artificial urinary sphincter implantation, five by ProACT™ balloons and one by a re-do I-Stop TOMS™. No severe complications were recorded at last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: I-Stop TOMS™ implantation is a safe and effective option in the short-term for mild to moderate PPI management. However, a significant trend to recurrence of leakage has been established after long-term follow-up. If confirmed by further studies, these results may substantially impact patient information before male sling implantation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

[Partial nephrectomy vs. radical nephrectomy for tumor>7cm]. / Résultats de la néphrectomie partielle pour les tumeurs de plus de 7cm : comparaison avec la néphrectomie élargie.

INTRODUCTION: The usefulness of partial nephrectomy (PN) has been demonstrated for the treatment of renal tumor<7cm and it is now the standard treatment for such lesions. However, few studies are available regarding tumors≥T2. The objective of this study was to assess PN results for the treatment of renal tumors>7cm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective two-center study was performed, including 170 patients treated. Thirty-two patients underwent PN and 138 radical nephrectomy (RN) for renal cT2 tumors between 2004 and 2014. The biological and clinical characteristics including perioperative morbidity as well as the survival rate were compared between these 2 groups. RESULTS: The median age was 59.5 years and the median follow-up was 47 months. More cT2b tumors were treated through RN (34.1% vs. 12.5%, P=0.01). The postoperative decrease in creatinine clearance was higher for the RN group (-24.3mL/min vs. -16.8; P=0.04). This difference was no longer significant at last follow-up. Perioperative complications were more frequent in the PN group (50.0% vs. 18.1%; P=0.008), and more severe (Clavien≥3 18.7% vs. 5.1%, P=0.01). No difference was found regarding the overall survival. Surgical margins were more frequent in the PN group (9.1% vs. 0.85%; P=0.01). CONCLUSION: Our results suggested the feasibility of PN for renal tumors>7cm, involving however a higher perioperative complication risk. Cautious patient selection appeared to be required for the indication of PN for large tumors. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

[HoLEP learning curve: Toward a standardised formation and a team strategy]. / Apprentissage de l'HoLEP : vers une formation standardisée et une stratégie d'équipe.

AIM: Holmium laser enucleation of prostate (HoLEP) is renowned for the difficulty of its learning curve. Our aim was to evaluate the interest of a three-step tutorial in the HoLEP learning curve, in a university center. METHODS: It is a retrospective, monocentric study of the 82 first procedures done consecutively by the same operator with a proctoring in early experience and after 40 procedures. For all patients were noted: enucleation efficiency (g/min), morcellation efficiency (g/min), percentage of enucleated tissue (enucleated tissue/adenome weigth evaluated by ultrasonography. g/g), perioperative morbidity (Clavien), length of hospital stay, length of urinary drainage, functional outcomes at short and middle term (Qmax, post-void residual volume [PVR], QOL scores and IPSS at 3 and 6months). RESULTS: Enucleation and morcellation efficiency were significantly higher after the second proctoring (0.87 vs 0.44g/min; P<0.0001 and 4.2 vs 3.37g/min, P=0.038, respectively) so as the prostatic volume (43.5 vs 68.1mL, P=0.0001). Percentage of enucleated tissue was higher in the second group, however, the difference was not significant (69.5% vs 80.4%, P=0.03). Per- and postoperative complications, hospital length of stay, urinary drainage length and functional results at 3 and 6months were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: The learning curve did not interfere with functional results. The second proctoring was essential to us in order to grasp the technique. These data underlined the necessity of a pedagogic reflexion in order to built a standardized formation technique to the HoLEP. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

[External sphincterotomy in neurological patients: A monocentric experience]. / Sphinctérotomie laser chez le patient porteur d'une vessie neurologique : une expérience monocentrique.

AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility, efficacy and tolerance of Greenlight™ and Holmium sphincterotomy for treating detrusor-sphincter dyssynergia. METHODS: All men treated with this two techniques between may 2012 and june 2015 were analyzed. Preoperative evaluation included kidney ultrasound scan, urodynamic, retrograde and voiding urethrocystography. Postoperative assessment was composed of a post-void residual volume measurement when the urethral catheter was removed and 1 year after the procedure, a retrograde and voiding urethrocystography at 3 months and telephonic Likert scale questionnaire. RESULTS: Twelve patients were operated with Greenlight™ and 12 with Holmium. Eleven had a memocath urethral stent preoperatively. Post-void residual volume median for both techniques was 285 cc preoperatively vs 137.5 cc postoperatively (P<0.001). Likert scale global satisfaction was 75%. Five stenosis (20.8%) were observed within a median of 4 months. CONCLUSION: Greenligth™ and Holmium procedures are efficient techniques with low morbidity. However, superiority toward monopolar incision remains to be demonstrated through complementary studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

[Prognostic factors for metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with second-line targeted therapies]. / Étude des facteurs pronostiques pour le carcinome rénal métastatique traité par une deuxième ligne de thérapies ciblées.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the prognostic value of clinical and biological features in patients treated with second-line targeted therapies (TT) for a metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective study was performed including 60 patients treated with second-line TT from 2006 to 2013. Clinical and biological features were collected, including TT-induced toxicities, Heng and MSKCC prognostic scores, and renal function. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed using univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: The median age was 61 years [39-81]. MSKCC and Heng scores were significantly prognostic for OS and PFS (P<0.05). Hypo-albuminemia, anemia and brain metastasis were associated with poorer OS and PFS (P<0.05). Severe induced toxicities had a prognostic impact with higher OS (26 months vs 10 months, P=0.003) and PFS (5 months vs 4 months, P=0.047). Renal function impairment at the initiation of the second line was also associated with higher survival (OS=24 months vs 9 months, P=0.035 and PFS=7 months vs 4 months, P=0.043). On multivariate analysis, induced toxicity was found as an independent factor of good prognosis for OS (HR=0.36; P=0.01). CONCLUSION: Our results suggested that renal function impairment and TT-induced toxicities in the second line of treatment for mRCC have a potential prognostic interest as it had previously been reported for the first line of TT. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5.

[CCAFU french national guidelines 2016-2018 on renal cancer]. / Recommandations en onco-urologie 2016-2018 du CCAFU : Cancer du rein.

The previous guidelines from the Cancer Committee of the Association Française d'Urologie were published in 2013. We wanted this new version to be simple, clear and straightforward. All significant recent publications on kidney cancer have been included. The main changes compared to 2013 are the following: © 2016 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

[French resident's performance on laparoscopic surgery box trainer: 7-year results of pelvitrainer contests]. / Performance des internes français sur simulateur de chirurgie laparoscopique : les résultats de 7 ans d'olympiades du pelvitrainer.

OBJECTIVES: The study objectives were to analyze the resident's laparoscopic surgery performance in order to build a self-assessment data set, to identify discriminatory exercises and to investigate the suturing time changes. METHODS: From 2007 to 2014, the French Association of Urologist in Training (AFUF) organized 7 pelvitrainer contests. Participant scores on 11 laparoscopic surgery exercises were evaluated. RESULTS: Sixty-six residents participated to these contests and performed 11 exercises each. Twenty-two (33.3 %) participants were beginners, 26 (39.4 %) intermediates et 18 (27.3 %) experienced. The participant scores were gathered into a data set including the average time per exercise. We found a time scoring improvement related to the resident experience for all exercises. A significant decline in time was noted for exercise 8 and 9 between beginners and intermediates (139s [±71]), (173.9s [±118.3]) and between beginners and experienced (80.6s [±26.7]), (94,1s [±42.7]) with a P<0.05. The correlation coefficient for the exercise 11 duration (vesico-uretral anastomosis) was 0.04 over a 7-year period (P=0.44). CONCLUSION: The study provided a data set on 11 laparoscopic surgery tasks which can be consulted by all residents as a reference in a self-assessment process. Two exercises (8 and 9) discriminated beginners from intermediates and experienced groups and could be used as a benchmark ahead of an operating room procedure. The vesico-uretral anastomosis duration (exercise 11) did not improve significantly between 2006 and 2014. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

[Treatment of pseudoaneurysm following partial nephrectomy]. / Prise en charge des faux anévrismes rénaux après néphrectomie partielle.

BACKGROUND: Partial nephrectomy (PN) has become the gold standard for the treatment of small tumors confined to the kidney. As result, the number of PN procedures increased during the last years. Subsequently, we have more often to deal with the complications of this surgery. Among these, pseudoaneurysms are rare but potentially life-threatening due to a risk of bleeding. Therefore, pseudoaneurysms have to be treated according to a relevant strategy. METHODS: We performed a literature review of the cases of pseudoaneurysm after PN was reported as well as a focus on the different treatment strategies and their outcomes. RESULTS: The incidence of pseudoaneurysm is low, ranging from 0.5% to 4%. Radio-embolization represents the gold standard treatment, used in 98% of the cases reported in the literature, allowing high success rate and rare morbidity. However, in some selected cases, surveillance could be an alternative.

[Does a tumor size higher than 7cm impact partial nephrectomy outcomes for the treatment of renal cancer?]. / Une taille tumorale supérieure à 7cm influence-t-elle les résultats de la néphrectomie partielle pour tumeur du rein ?

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of a tumor size higher than 7cm on partial nephrectomy (PN) outcomes compared to a tumor size ranging between 4 and 7cm and to compare this impact to one of the RENAL score. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from patients who underwent PN between 2006 and 2013 were retrospectively analysed. Patients with cT1b tumors and cT2 were included. Functional and oncological outcomes were compared. Analysis of the achievement of Trifecta (defined as a combination of warm ischemia time<25min, negative surgical margins and no perioperative complications) was performed according to the tumor size and the RENAL score. RESULTS: Among 334 PN, 57 patients were included, (41 cT1b and 16 cT2), with a median follow-up of 23.5 months (6-88). There was no difference between the groups regarding intraoperative parameters except for the conversion rate, which was higher in the cT2 group (30% vs. 4.3%; P=0.02). The cT2 group also presented higher renal function impairment at postoperative day 4 (P=0.04) which did not persist at 6 months. There was no significant difference in oncologic outcomes between the 2 groups. The rate of achievement of the Trifecta did not differ between cT1b and cT2 groups. Conversely, Trifecta rate was higher in case of low complexity renal masses (RENAL score 4-6) compared to complex renal tumors (RENAL score 7-9 and 10-12). CONCLUSION: Our results showed that a tumor size higher than 7cm had no impact on PN outcomes in selected tumors according to complexity scores such as the RENAL score. Furthermore, a lower RENAL score appeared to be significantly associated with the Trifecta achievement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5.