ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: We performed a prospective randomized comparison among Retrograde IntraRenal Surgery (RIRS) and MiniPerc (MP) for stones between 10 and 20 mm to evaluate outcomes with the same laser device: Fiber Dust. METHODS: Patients with a single renal stone between 10 and 20 mm were randomized to RIRS (Group A) versus MP (Group B). Exclusion criteria were age < 18 or > 75, presence of acute infection, coagulation impairments, cardiovascular or pulmonary comorbidities. In both groups, the Fiber Dust laser was used. A CT scan after 3 months was performed. A negative CT scan or asymptomatic patients with stone fragments < 3 mm and a negative urinary culture were the criteria to assess the stone-free status. A statistical analysis was carried out to assess success, complication and retreatment rates and need for auxiliary treatments. RESULTS: Between January 2021 and January 2022, 186 patients were enrolled (90 in Group A and 96 in Group B). Mean stone size was 15.8 mm and 14.9 mm in Group A and B, respectively (p = 0.23). The overall stone-free rate (SFR) was 73.3% for Group A and 84.4% for Group B. A higher SFR was reached for upper calyceal stones in Group A (90.4%) lower calyceal stones in Group B (91.6%). Retreatment rate (p = 0.31) and auxiliary procedure rate (p = 0.18) were comparable. Complication rate was 5.5% and 5.2% for Groups A and B, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: RIRS and MP are both effective to obtain a postoperative SFR with Fiber Dust. According to the stone position one treatment is superior to the other one.
Subject(s)
Kidney Calculi , Nephrostomy, Percutaneous , Dust , Humans , Kidney Calculi/surgery , Lasers , Nephrostomy, Percutaneous/methods , Prospective Studies , Thulium/therapeutic use , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: To compare clinical intra and early postoperative outcomes between conventional Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate using the Virtual Basket tool (VB-HoLEP) to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: This prospective randomized study enrolled consecutive patients with BPH, who were assigned to undergo either HoLEP (n = 100), or VB-HoLEP (n = 100). All patients were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively, with particular attention to catheterization time, operative time, blood loss, irrigation volume and hospital stay. We also evaluated the patients at 3 and 6 months after surgery and assessed maximum flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual urine volume (PVR), the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and the Quality of Life score (QOLS). RESULTS: No significant differences in preoperative parameters between patients in each study arm were found. Compared to HoLEP, VB-HoLEP resulted in less hemoglobin decrease (2.54 vs. 1.12 g/dl, P = 0.03) and reduced operative time (57.33 ± 29.71 vs. 42.99 ± 18.51 min, P = 0.04). HoLEP and VB-HoLEP detrmined similar catheterization time (2.2 vs. 1.9 days, P = 0.45), irrigation volume (33.3 vs. 31.7 l, P = 0.69), and hospital stay (2.8 vs. 2.7 days, P = 0.21). During the 6-month follow-up no significant differences in IPSS, Qmax, PVR, and QOLS were demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: HoLEP and VB-HoLEP are both efficient and safe procedures for relieving lower urinary tract symptoms. VB-HoLEP was statistically superior to HoLEP in blood loss and operative time. However, procedures did not differ significantly in catheterization time, hospital stay, and irrigation volume. No significant differences were demonstrated in QOLS, IPSS, Qmax and PVR throughout the 6-month follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN72879639; date of registration: June 25th, 2015. Retrospectively registred.
Subject(s)
Lasers, Solid-State/therapeutic use , Postoperative Hemorrhage/prevention & control , Prostatectomy/methods , Prostatic Hyperplasia/surgery , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Single-Blind Method , Time FactorsABSTRACT
This article is addressed to general practitioners and summarizes some of the latest developments in urology. Recent advances in screening, diagnosis and medical as well as surgical treatments of common urological diseases are reviewed.
Subject(s)
Urologic Diseases , Humans , Male , Prostatic Diseases/diagnosis , Prostatic Diseases/therapy , Urinary Bladder Diseases/diagnosis , Urinary Bladder Diseases/therapy , Urologic Diseases/diagnosis , Urologic Diseases/therapyABSTRACT
In this article, we summarize second and third lines therapeutic strategies for the management of erectile dysfunction. We also highlight common errors that can hinder the effectiveness of first-line treatment. Second-line strategies can also be considered upfront in patients with contraindications to PDE5 inhibitors.
