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.

Differences in the percutaneous nephrolithotomy practice patterns among Latin American urologists with and without endourology training

ABSTRACT Purpose: Although the worldwide percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) practice pat- terns determined via a survey sent to members of the Endourological Society have been published, differences in PCNL practice patterns among Latin American urologists based on endourological or lithiasis training have not been published. To determine the PCNL practice patterns among Latin American urologists with and without training in endourology. Materials and Methods: The SurveyMonkey® web platform was used to develop a 27-item survey on PCNL for the treatment of renal stones, and the survey was sent via e- -mail and other electronic media to 2000 urologists from 15 Latin American countries. Endourology-trained (group 1) and nontrained urologists (group 2) were analyzed. The group results were compared using the chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests. SPSS version 20 for Windows was used for all analyses. Results: A total of 331 urologists responded to the survey (rate of 16.55%): 221 (66.7%) in group 1 and 110 (33.2%) in group 2). In groups 1 and 2, 91.9% and 63.2% performed PCNL, respectively: 85.1% and 58.5% used preoperative tomography, respectively; 12.7% and 4.7% used preoperative nephrolitometry nomograms, respectively: 45.2% and 32.1% used endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery, respectively: 68.3% and 38.7% used mul- tiple percutaneous tract realization, respectively: and 19.9% and 5.7% used minimally invasive PCNL, respectively (all p=0.0005). Conclusions: Statistically significant differences were observed in PCNL practice patterns of Latin American urologists with and without training in endourology. Specific training in endourology significantly influence the practice patterns of Latin American urologists.