Development and validation of a predictive model for treatment outcome after emergency extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in patients with symptomatic ureteral stones during the COVID-19 pandemic: in a large prospective cohort.

The predictors of treatment outcome after emergency extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) are not well characterized. Therefore, based on a large prospective cohort, we aimed to develop and validate a nomogram for predicting treatment outcome after emergency SWL in patients with symptomatic ureteral stones. The development cohort included 358 patients with symptomatic ureteral stones who underwent emergency SWL between June 2020 and August 2021 in our hospital. One hundred and twenty-nine patients with symptomatic ureteral stones participated in the validation cohort from September 2021 to April 2022. The data were prospectively recorded. The backward stepwise selection was applied using the likelihood ratio test with Akaike's information criterion as the stopping rule. The efficacy of this predictive model was assessed concerning its clinical usefulness, calibration, and discrimination. Finally, 15.6% (56/358) of patients in the development cohort and 14.0% (18/129) of those in the validation cohort suffered from stone-free failure after emergency SWL. We identified four predictors for stone-free failure: stone size, stone density, skin to stone distance (SSD), and degree of hydronephrosis. This model showed good discrimination with an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves of 0.935 (0.899-0.971) and good calibration (P = 0.059). The decision curve analysis showed that the model was clinically valuable. In this large prospective cohort, we found that stone size, stone density, SSD, and degree of hydronephrosis were predictors of treatment outcome after emergency SWL. This nomogram will be helpful in preoperative risk stratification to provide individualized treatment recommendations for each patient. Furthermore, early identification and appropriate management of patients may increase the success rate of emergency SWL during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Comparison of shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy in patients with proximal ureteral stones under the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness, safety, and cost between ultrasound-guided shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) with an early second session protocol and ureteroscopy (URS) in patients with proximal ureteral stones using the propensity score matching (PSM) method based on a large prospective study. METHODS: This prospective study was conducted in a tertiary hospital from June 2020 to April 2022. Patients who underwent lithotripsy (SWL or URS) for proximal ureteral stones were enrolled. The stone-free rate (SFR), complications, and cost were recorded. PSM analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 1230 patients were included, of whom 81.1% (998) were treated with SWL and 18.9% (232) were treated with URS. After PSM, the SWL group had an equivalent SFR at one month (88.7 vs. 83.6%, P = 0.114) compared with the URS group. Complications were rare and comparable between the two groups, while the incidence of ureteral injuries was higher in the URS group compared with the SWL group (1.4 vs. 0%, P = 0.011). The hospital stay was significantly shorter (1 day vs. 2 days, P < 0.001), and the cost was considerably less (2000 vs. 25,053, P < 0.001) in the SWL group compared with the URS group. CONCLUSION: This prospective PSM cohort demonstrated that ultrasound-guided SWL with an early second session protocol had equivalent effectiveness but better safety and lower cost compared with URS in the treatment of patients with proximal ureteral stones, whether the stones were radiopaque or radiolucent. These results will facilitate treatment decisions for proximal ureteral stones.

Acute extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for ureteric stones - 7-years' experience from a busy district general hospital.

OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of acute extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) for ureteric stones we present our experience of ESWL in 530 ureteric stone cases, in the largest UK series we are aware of to date. ESWL is underutilised in ureteric stone management. The Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) report showed just four units nationally treated >10% of acute ureteric stones with ESWL. Despite guideline recommendations as a first-line treatment option, few large volume studies have been published. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data between December 2012 and February 2020 was performed. Data relating to patient demographics, stone characteristics, skin-to-stone distance, and treatment failure were collected. Cost analysis was conducted by the Trust's surgical financial manager. Multivariable analyses were performed to assess for predictors of ESWL success. RESULTS: A success rate of 68% (95% confidence interval 64%-72%) at 6 weeks was observed (n = 530). The median (interquartile range) number of treatment sessions was 2 (1, 2). Stone diameter was observed to be a predictor of ESWL success. The small number of stones treated of >13 mm or >1250 HU had an ~50% chance of successful treatment. Acute ureteric ESWL was less costly than acute ureterorenoscopy, consistent with findings from previous NHS studies. CONCLUSION: Acute ESWL is a safe, reliable, and financially viable treatment option for a wider spectrum of patients than reflected in international guidelines based on our large, heterogenous series. In the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) era, with theatre access reduced and concerns over aerosol generating procedures, acute ESWL remains an attractive first-line treatment option.

Consensus Statement on Urinary Stone Treatment During a Pandemic: A Delphi Process from the Endourological Society TOWER Research Initiative.

Introduction: The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has had a significant impact on the care of patients with urolithiasis. Recommendations and prioritization of endourologic surgical procedures vary among regions, and a comprehensive overall international directive is needed. We used the Delphi method to obtain international consensus on managing urolithiasis patients during the pandemic. Methods: A three-round Delphi process was used to elicit expert consensus (53 global key opinion leaders within the Endourological Society from 36 countries) on an extensive survey on management of endourologic patients in a pandemic. Questions addressed general management, inpatient and outpatient procedures, clinic visits, follow-up care, and best practices for suspension and resumption of routine care. Results: Consensus was achieved in 64/84 (76%) questions. Key consensus findings included the following: consultations should be delivered remotely when possible. Invasive surgical procedures for urolithiasis patients should be reserved for high-risk situations (infection, renal failure, etc.). To prevent aerosolization, spinal anesthesia is preferred over general, whenever feasible. Treatment of asymptomatic renal stones should be deferred. Primary definitive treatment of obstructing or symptomatic stones (both renal and ureteral) is preferred over temporizing drainage. Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy should be continued for obstructive ureteral stones. There was consensus on treatment modalities and drainage strategies depending on location and size of the stone. Conclusion: International endourologist members of the Endourological Society participated in this Delphi initiative to provide expert consensus on management of urolithiasis during a pandemic. These results can be applied currently and during a future pandemic.

Association between time to lithotripsy and stone-free rate in patients with ureteral stones undergoing shock wave lithotripsy.

Early shock wave lithotripsy is associated with higher stone-free rate compared to delayed treatment of ureteral stones, but may constitute overtreatment because ureteral stones can pass spontaneously. We studied the association between time to treatment and stone-free rate in patients with ureteral stones to determine optimal shock wave lithotripsy timing. We retrospectively analyzed 537 patients undergoing shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral stones. Patients were divided into five groups according to time from onset of symptoms to lithotripsy-urgent (0-3 days), early (4-30 days), late (31-60 days), long-delayed lithotripsy (≥ 61 days), and asymptomatic. Stone-free rates were compared among groups. Mean age and stone size were 55.6 ± 13.1 years and 7.48 ± 3.29 mm, respectively. Mean number of shock wave lithotripsy sessions and stone-free rate were 1.37 and 91.6%, respectively, in the overall population. Stone-free rates were 95.2%, 96.8%, 91.3%, 86.3%, and 82.7% in urgent, early, late, long-delayed lithotripsy, and asymptomatic groups, respectively. Long-delayed lithotripsy and asymptomatic groups had significantly more lithotripsy sessions and lower stone-free rate, compared to urgent and early lithotripsy groups. In multivariate analysis, time to lithotripsy [long-delayed lithotripsy (odds ratio: 0.273, p = 0.004) and asymptomatic nature (odds ratio: 0.236, p = 0.002)] and age (odds ratio: 0.959, p = 0.003) independently affected stone-free rate. In conclusion, time to lithotripsy is a strong predictive factor for stone-free status following shock wave lithotripsy. Urgent shock wave lithotripsy did not improve stone-free rate if performed within 1 month. However, time to shock wave lithotripsy > 2 months reduced likelihood of stone-free status.

Impact of COVID-19 outbreak on urology surgical waiting lists and waiting lists prioritization strategies in the Post-COVID-19 era. / Impacto del brote de COVID-19 en las listas de espera de cirugía urológica y estrategias de priorización en la era post-COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The suspension of most elective surgeries during COVID-19 pandemic caused the lengthening of urology surgical waiting lists. The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on urology surgical waiting list in a high-volume hospital. METHODS: An observational descriptive study was designed. All patients included in the urology surgical waiting list of our high-volume center on May 1st 2020 (46 days after the suspension of elective surgery) were analyzed. Baseline variables, priority on the waiting list, main urological disease, type of scheduled surgery, and waiting time were recorded. Other variables recorded were the presence of a urinary catheter, number of accesses to the emergency department, evidence of COVID-19 infection, number of deaths and their cause. The waiting time for each disease was compared with the time to surgery in 2019. RESULTS: A total of 350 patients were included. The mean (SD) time on the waiting list was 97.33 (55.47) days. Priority 1 patients, who normally should undergo surgery within 30 days, were on the waiting list for a mean (SD) time of 60.51 (20.14) days. They were mainly patients with ureteral lithiasis (25.6%), high-risk or muscle-invasive bladder cancer (20.9%) and high-risk prostate cancer (13.9%). The mean waiting time had already significantly exceeded the mean time to surgery in 2019 for radical cystectomy (p = 0.04) and URS (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The suspension of most elective surgeries due to COVID-19 had a significant impact on urology surgical waiting list of our high-volume center, especially in priority 1 group.

Impacts of the COVID-19 outbreak on visits and treatments for patients with ureteral stones in a general hospital emergency department.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 is a challenge for both patients and physicians in emergency department (ED). This study was aimed to report the impacts of the COVID-19 outbreak on visits and treatments for patients with ureteral stones in a general hospital ED. METHODS: The patients with ureteral stones were collected from 24 January to 24 March 2020 during the COVID-19 outbreak in Beijing. Two periods were divided for study: 24 January to 24 February (Period 1) and 25 February to 24 March (Period 2). Data on patients' characteristics, attendance, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, stone features, and final treatment choices were retrieved from the computer and compared with the data in the same periods in 2019. RESULTS: The study included 376 patients with ureteral stones during the COVID-19 outbreak periods in 2020 and 343 patients during the same periods in 2019. Compared with the same periods in 2019, the number of patients with ureteral stones was less in Period 1 (137 vs 163) but had a rebound phenomenon in Period 2 (239 vs 180). The visit frequency was significantly reduced (2.6 ± 0.4 vs 3.6 ± 0.8, p < 0.01) and the VAS scores and the onset time increased (7.7 ± 1.3 vs 5.5 ± 1.6, p < 0.01; 7.4 ± 1.8 vs 8.2 ± 1.5, p < 0.01, respectively) in Period 1. More patients chose oral analgesics medication to release from renal colic in the COVID-19 outbreak period instead of ESWL and intravenous analgesics medication (Period 1, 54.0% vs 20.2%, p < 0.01; Period 2, 20.9% vs 13.3%, p = 0.044; respectively). However, the percentage of patients underwent endoscopy surgery in outbreak period showed no significant difference compared with that in 2019. CONCLUSION: These results showed that the COVID-19 outbreak can directly affect the visits and final treatment choices for patients with ureteral stones.

Treatment management of COVID-19 positive patients with renal colic secondary to distal ureteral stone.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to contribute to the literature by sharing and evaluating the clinical characteristics and our treatment and follow-up approaches in patients in the COVID-19 positive treatment process who had presented to our hospital's emergency department with a distal ureteral stone and to examine the effects of the pandemic and disease in this group of patients. METHOD: The study included 14 patients infected with COVID-19 who had presented to the Erzurum City Hospital Emergency Department between August 2020 and December 2020 with the complaint of renal colic in which distal ureteral stones were detected in the tests. The demographic and clinical characteristics of patients, laboratory and radiological examinations, characteristics of ureteral stones, details of treatments applied to patients, treatment procedures of patients who had undergone surgical treatment, patient files, visit and operation notes and the patient discharge reports were retrospectively reviewed and evaluated. RESULTS: The study included 14 patients. The average age of the patients was 35.7 (±14.35). The average stone size was 6.2 (±1.8) mm. Analgesic treatment and MET for distal ureteral stones were begun in 11 (78.6%) of the patients. Pain control was achieved in nine patients (64.2%) with analgesic treatment and MET, and the stone was removed without invasive intervention. Surgical intervention was performed in a total of five patients (35.7%). CONCLUSION: In most COVID-19 infected patients with renal colic and a distal ureteral stone, results can be obtained using MET. Patients with a distal ureteral stone and persistent renal colic can be safely and effectively treated by endoscopic ureteral stone treatment after taking necessary precautions. Prospective, randomised, and controlled studies are required on this subject.

Assessment of trends and clinical presentation in the emergency department of patients with renal colic during the COVID-19 pandemic era. / Evaluación de las tendencias y presentación clínica de pacientes con cólico nefrítico que acuden al servicio de urgencias durante la era pandémica del COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: We hypothesized that the recent COVID-19 pandemic may lead to a delay in renal colic patients presenting to the Emergency Department due to the fear of getting infected. This delay may lead to a more severe clinical condition at presentation with possible complications for the patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective review of data collected from three institutions from Spain and Italy. Patients who presented to Emergency Department with unilateral or bilateral renal colic caused by imaging confirmed urolithiasis during the 45 days before and after each national lockdown were included. Data collected included patients' demographics, biochemical urine and blood tests, radiological tests, signs, symptoms and the therapeutic management. Analysis was performed between two groups, Group A: patients presenting prior to the national lockdown date; and Group B: patients presenting after the national lockdown date. RESULTS: A total of 397 patients presented to Emergency Department with radiology confirmed urolithiasis and were included in the study. The number of patients presenting to Emergency Department with renal/ureteric colic was 285 (71.8%) patients in Group A and 112 (28.2%) patients in Group B (p<0.001). The number of patients reporting a delay in presentation was 135 (47.4%) in Group A and 63 (56.3%) in Group B (p=0.11). At presentation, there were no statistical differences between Group A and Group B regarding the serum creatinine level, C reactive protein, white blood cell count, fever, oliguria, flank pain and hydronephrosis. In addition, no significant differences were observed with the length of stay, Urology department admission requirement and type of therapy. CONCLUSION: Data from our study showed a significant reduction in presentations to Emergency Department for renal colic after the lockdown in Spain and Italy. However, we did not find any significant difference with the length of stay, Urology department admission requirement and type of therapy.

A rare case of spontaneous parenchymal kidney explosion in a patient with ureteral obstruction caused by a single stone.

INTRODUCTION: Spontaneous rupture of kidney may involve collecting system or parenchyma. Parenchymal rupture usually occurs in patients with renal cell carcinoma, angiomyolipoma, renal cysts, arteriovenous malformation or vascular diseases such as periarteritis nodosa. Collecting system rupture is usually a rare complication of obstructive urolithiasis. We describe the unusual cases of spontaneous kidney rupture in patients with acute urinary obstruction. CASE PRESENTATION: The case report describes the left parenchymal kidney explosion related to ipsilateral ureteral obstruction caused by a single ureteral stone. The patient reached our emergency department with acute left flank pain and massive haematuria. At the moment of admission, the patient was in stage III hypovolemic shock and had a lower haematocrit (haemoglobin = 4.9 g/dL). Despite blood transfusions, emergency surgical exploration, extrafascial nephrectomy and intensive support care, the patient died twelve hours after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Parenchymal renal rupture can be a life-threatening emergency. Despite its rarity, in the differential diagnosis of acute abdomen, parenchymal renal rupture should always be considered in patients with abdominal pain and an anamnesis or history of urinary stones, pointing out the need of early diagnosis also in benign urological conditions.

Implementation of a Ureteric Colic Telemedicine Service: A Mixed Methods Quality Improvement Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of a telemedicine service for ureteric colic patients in reducing the number of unnecessary face-to-face consultations and shortening waiting time for appointments. METHODS: A telemedicine workflow was implemented as a quality improvement study using the Plan-Do-Study-Act method. All patients presenting with ureteric colic without high-risk features of fever, severe pain, and hydronephrosis, were recruited, and face-to-face appointments to review scan results were replaced with phone consultations. Data were prospectively collected over 3 years (January 2017 to December 2019). Patient outcomes including the reduction in face-to-face review visits, time to review, reattendance and intervention rates, were tracked in an interrupted time-series analysis, and qualitative feedback was obtained from patients and clinicians. RESULTS: Around 53.2% of patients presenting with ureteric colic were recruited into the telemedicine workflow. A total of 465 patients (46.2%) had normal scan results and 250 patients (24.9%) did not attend their scan appointments, hence reducing the number of face-to-face consultations by 71.1%. A total of 230 patients (22.9%) required subsequent follow-up with urology, while 61 patients (6.1%) were referred to other specialties. Mean (SD) time to review was 30.0 (6.2) days, 6-month intervention rate was 3.4% (n = 34) and unplanned reattendance rate was 3.2% (n = 32). Around 93.1% of patients reported satisfaction with the service. CONCLUSION: The ureteric colic telemedicine service successfully and sustainably reduced the number of face-to-face consultations and time to review without compromising on patient safety. The availability of this telemedicine service has become even more important in helping us provide care to patients with ureteric colic in the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Postoperative myocardial injury in a patient with left ureteric stone and asymptomatic COVID-19 disease.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It was first identified on 8thDecember 2019 in Wuhan, Hubei, China, and has since spread globally to become an emergency of international concern. Patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 may be asymptomatic or present with symptoms ranging from mild clinical manifestations: such as fever, cough, and sore throat to moderate and severe form of the disease such as pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). In some patients, SARS-CoV-2 can affect the heart and cause myocardial injury which is evidenced either by electrocardiographic (ECG) changes or by a rise in serum troponin level. Patients with myocardial involvement are generally at risk of developing severe illness and tend to have a poor outcome. We hereby present a case of a hypertensive male patient with undiagnosed, asymptomatic COVID-19, who underwent an emergency urologic procedure for ureteric calculi. He eventually sustained a postoperative myocardial injury resulting in his demise. This case highlights the importance of detailed preoperative assessment and anticipation of complications during this global pandemic.

The Increased Risk of Complicated Ureteral Stones in the Era of COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: Ureteral stone disease may be an emergent condition if the appropriate management is not performed in a timely manner. As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to spread globally, isolation and restriction orders taken by the governments have become the cores to control the pandemic. In this study, we, therefore, aimed to investigate the ureteral stone presentations in a high-volume university hospital during the COVID-19 restriction order period. Materials and Methods: The data of 149 patients who were hospitalized due to ureteral stone both during the COVID-19 pandemic restriction period and the corresponding period (non-COVID-19) of the previous year were collected and analyzed retrospectively. Unpaired Student's t-test was used to compare continuous variables. The categorical data were assessed using Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. Results: Of 149 patients, 35 were hospitalized in the COVID-19 restrictions period. While the mean age and the stone characteristics of the two groups did not differ significantly, serum creatinine levels (1.9 ± 1.85 vs 1.15 ± 0.64) and the white blood cell counts (12.45 ± 6.54 vs 8.21 ± 4.15) at hospital admission were significantly higher in the COVID-19 restrictions group (p = 0.034 and p = 0.005, respectively). According to the priority classification recommendations of the European Urology Guidelines Office Rapid Reaction Group for urolithiasis applicable during the COVID-19 pandemic, a significant difference was observed between the two periods (X2 = 9.907, p = 0.019). In particular, the rate of emergency cases was found more than threefold in the COVID-19 period. Although there was no significant difference in terms of the grade of hydronephrosis at hospital admission between the two groups, the rates of grade 3 and 4 hydronephrosis were higher in the COVID-period group (1.8- and 3.3-fold, respectively). Conclusion: The rate of complicated ureteral stone disease significantly increased during the COVID-19 restrictions period. Urologists should prioritize the patients most in need of urgent care during COVID-19-like biosocial crisis.