Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy: A Comparison of Primary Simple Prostatectomy vs Salvage Simple Prostatectomy in Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms.

Purpose: Simple prostatectomy is indicated in patients with enlarged glands (>80 g) who present with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) attributed to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Salvage robotic simple prostatectomy (SSP) is defined as simple prostatectomy after failed transurethral procedure. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of primary robotic simple prostatectomy (PSP) vs SSP in ameliorating LUTS. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 124 patients who underwent RSP between 2013 and 2021. Indications for surgery were enlarged prostate, bothersome LUTS, or symptoms refractory to medical management and/or previous prostate surgery. PSP and SSP preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative variables were recorded. The severity of LUTS was assessed using the International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS). Two-tailed t-tests were performed to compare primary vs salvage RSP cohorts at a p-value of 0.05. Results: Of 124 patients who underwent RSP, 98 were primary and 26 were in the salvage setting with 19 patients undergoing prior transurethral resection of the prostate, 3 status post-transurethral microwave therapy, 1 status post-transurethral needle ablation of the prostate, and 3 status post-UroLIFT. Mean length of stay following RSP was 1.87 (days). At mean follow-up of ∼12 months, no patient required reoperation for LUTS. Preoperative IPSS for primary and salvage RSP was 18.56 and 16.25, respectively (p = 0.36), and postoperative IPSS for primary and salvage RSP was 5.33 and 8.00, respectively (p = 0.38). Conclusion: Regardless of primary or salvage indication, RSP remains a highly efficient and durable procedure for improvement in LUTS. RSP performed in the salvage setting greatly improved urinary function outcomes in patients after failure of previous transurethral procedures.

The Role of Intraoperative Urinary Catheters on Postoperative Urinary Retention after Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Multi-Hospital Retrospective Study on 9,580 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Urinary catheters (UC) are used by some surgeons during total joint arthroplasty (TJA). This study investigated the impact of intraoperative urinary catheters on postoperative urinary retention (POUR) following TJA cases. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective comparative study across 11 medical centers on 9,580 TJA patients. Visits to urgent care or the emergency department within 7 and 30 postoperative days were reviewed. Medical records over a 12-month period for all patients older than 18 years old were used to gather demographic and surgical data as well as the incidence of urinary tract infection (UTI). Chi-squared tests (RStudio) were used to determine statistical significance against P-Values (P) < 0.05. RESULTS: 13 (0.14%) patients returned within 7 days for POUR. POUR was more common in males [10 (0.3%) vs. 3 (0.1%) females, (P = 0.01)]. There was no difference in POUR when comparing total hip and knee arthroplasty procedures [0.16% vs. 0.12%, (P = 0.60)]. Of all operations, 25% had intraoperative UC use. There was no difference in POUR between the UC and no UC groups [0.21 vs. 0.11%, (P = 0.26)]. However, there was an increase in UTI in UC vs. no UC use within 7 postoperative days [0.92 vs. 0.43%, (P = 0.005)] and 30 postoperative days [2.60 vs. 1.50 %, (P < 0.001)]. CONCLUSION: In our study, there was no difference in POUR rates between the intraoperative UC vs. no UC groups. Therefore, the use of intraoperative UC may not decrease the rate of POUR following TJA procedures. Additionally, UTI risk was higher in the UC group which may be attributable to other factors, especially when comparing female vs. male patients.

Population Management Approach to Kidney Stone Care Improves Patient Compliance to Preventive Measures and Reduces Resource Utilization in Patients at High Risk for Stone Recurrence.

INTRODUCTION: Nephrolithiasis is a chronic condition with 5 to 10-year recurrence rates as high as 50%. Stone recurrence can be reduced by implementing American Urological Association kidney stone medical management guidelines, which recommend additional metabolic testing for high risk, recurrent and interested first-time stone formers. However, clinician adherence to guidelines is variable, and patient compliance with preventive evaluations is low. We evaluated our kidney stone population management program's role in patient compliance with completing American Urological Association metabolic studies. We assessed the program's impact on office encounters, operating room procedures and emergency department visits for known high risk kidney stone patients. METHODS: A retrospective review of electronic medical records between 2009 and 2017 identified 4,029 kidney stone patients. A total of 873 patients were at high risk for kidney stone recurrence. In 2013, we established a population management program in which high risk patients were referred and followed by a nurse case manager. Patients were contacted by email or telephone if metabolic serum and urine collections were incomplete. Office, operating room and emergency department visits were compared before and after the program's implementation. RESULTS: Metabolic evaluation orders increased from 17% to 35% in our institution's urology department. Patient compliance with recommended studies improved from <10% to 82%, and reductions in office visits by 48%, surgical procedures by 38% and emergency department encounters by 40% were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our program improved patient compliance with American Urological Association recommended studies for high risk kidney stone patients. Reductions in stone events may have been due to our program but require further study in the future.