Management of a kidney stone in ectopic pelvic kidney with Extracorporeal Shockwave Litothripsy: Description of a case and revision of literature.

Urolithiasis is one of the most frequent disease in the population and it represents one of the most frequent causes of access to emergency department. In addition. congenital anomalies occur more often in the kidney than in any other organ and the association of both renal abnormalities and stones is of clinical relevance. In this report, we discuss a case of a women with pelvic ectopic kidney affected by a large pyelic stone treated with ESWL (Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy).

Metastasis of the epididymis and spermatic cord from pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A rare entity. Description of a case and revision of literature.

INTRODUCTION: Metastatic epididymal and spermatic cord adenocarcinoma from epithelial tumors are a rare condition. The most frequent primary cancers are prostate, lung, kidney, gastrointestinal tumors and breast. In literature, there are very low number of cases reporting metastasis from pancreatic cancer to epididymis and spermatic cord. CASE DESCRIPTION: We report a case of 70-years old man with history of left orchiectomy for undescended testicle, who presented to our department with a palpable nodule in the right scrotum. Scrotal ultrasound revealed an inhomogeneous hypoechoic nodule of epididymis and/or spermatic cord. Neoplastic markers showed high levels of CEA (carcinoembryonic antigen) and bHCG (beta Human Chorionic Gonadotropin). The patient underwent right surgical scrotal exploration with orchifunicolectomy. Pathologic examination revealed pathologic tissue showing rare glandular structures. Immunohistochemistry profile was compatible with malign epithelial neoplasm with glandular differentiation. Total body CT-scan revealed pathologic tissue in pancreas between head and body and a suspect pathologic lesion in liver and 18-FDG PET-scan confirmed the pancreatic neoplastic mass and a suspect secondary hepatic lesion. Biopsy of pancreatic pathologic area was positive for ductal pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The patient was sent to oncologic evaluation and started chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Malignancies of epididymis and spermatic cord are rare entities and, in literature, very low number of cases of metastasis from pancreatic carcinoma to epididymis and spermatic cord are described. Early differential diagnosis is fundamental mostly in those patients with age range unusual for testis cancers.

A retrospective comparison between transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyze the differences between TRUSguided transrectal prostate biopsy (TR) and transperineal prostate biopsy (TP) in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. The two biopsy methods were evaluated in terms of diagnostic sensitivity and of early and late complications. METHODS: This retrospective study was realized through the review of clinical records of 219 men that received a prostate biopsy between 2004 and 2014. The biopsy was performed because of elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA), abnormal digital rectal examination findings (DRE), abnormal transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) findings and symptoms due to prostate diseases. The cohort study was subdivided in two groups: 108 patients received a transrectal biopsy between 2004 and 2006 and 111 received a transperineal biopsy between 2007 and 2014. In both groups, first biopsy was performed with 12 cores scheme whereas second or third biopsy were performed with 18 cores scheme; in this study we excluded patients who underwent to biopsies with different number cores to reduce the bias. Both groups were evaluated on the basis of age, total PSA, PSA ratio (F/T), DRE/TRUS findings, presence/absence of low urinary tracts symptoms (LUTS), presence/absence of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), histologic findings of biopsy cores and immediate/postoperative complications. Then, it was evaluated the overall cancer detection rate and the stratified cancer rate on the basis of the previous reported parameters. Finally, we analyzed the early and late complication rate in both groups. U Mann-Whitney test was used to evaluate the quantitative variables and χ2-test or Fisher exact test for qualitative variables. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: 66 cancers were detected in 219 patients of the study; 29 cancers were detected in the TP group and 37 in the TR group. There were no statistically significant differences in the overall cancer rate detected in both groups (26.13% e 34.26% respectively; p = 0.190). However, TP biopsy detected more cancers at first biopsy than TR biopsy (89.7% vs 78.4% respectively; p = 0.021). Moreover, TP biopsy detected more cancers in those patients with low cancer suspect (PSA < 4 ng/ml, F/T > 15%, negative TRUS), instead TR biopsy had more sensitivity in detecting cancer in those patients with high cancer suspect (PSA > 10 ng/ml, F/T < 15%, TRUS with abnormal lesions). The presence of BPH did not influence sensitivity in both cases. There were no significant differences in the early complication rate whereas a statistically significant difference was observed in the late complication rate (4% vs 11% in TP and TR biopsy, respectively; p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant differences in sensitivity were observed between TP and TR biopsy, but TP biopsy detected more cancers at first time biopsy. Complications rate was lower in the TP group. Therefore, we conclude that the Urologist has the final choice in deciding the most appropriate biopsy technique, considering sensitivity and complications.