Management of urinary-tract fistulas using reversible balloon nephrostomy: a single-center retrospective analysis of 56 patients.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of balloon nephrostomy (BN) for treating urinary tract fistulas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a single-center retrospective analysis, 56 patients were treated using BN between 2003 and 2014. All causes of urinary tract fistula were included. We assessed the effectiveness of drainage, complications, and the types of reconstruction surgery used. Success was defined as fistula closure without surgery. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 25 males (54%) and 31 females (55%) with a median age of 63 years who underwent BN for a urinary fistula secondary to surgery, i.e., urologic (40%; n = 22), gynecologic (34%; n = 19), or digestive (20%; n = 11). Of these patients, 48 (86%) had a history of cancer (49% had a tumor progression). Median drainage time was 90 days (10-583), with an average of three successive readjustments needed per patient. We obtained a 21% success rate (n = 12), morbidity was 6.5% (urinary sepsis, renal abscess, ureteral stricture), and 7% of patients developed ureteral stricture after balloon removal. There was no recurrence of any fistula within a median follow-up time of 15.2 months. CONCLUSION: This minimally invasive procedure can be used for selected urinary tract fistulas with few complications. It can also be used safely in populations that have several comorbidities.

Evaluation of the impact of a clinical pathway on the progression of acute urinary retention.

AIMS: The management of acute urinary retention (AUR) revolves around trial without catheter (TWOC) after prescription of an alpha-blocker. This study evaluates the implementation of a clinical pathway for AUR. METHODS: Specific clinical pathways for AUR was established between the Emergency Department and the Department of Urology in order to reduce the duration of bladder drainage that included standard prescriptions, an information sheet, and a note to be faxed to scheduling nurses to organize the trial without catheter (TWOC). The main endpoint was the reduction in the time between the AUR episode and TWOC, without decreasing urination. RESULTS: Between April 2015 and December 2016, 248 patients were treated in the Emergency Department, and externally, for AUR. One hundred and seventy patients were enrolled in the pathway group and 78 in the control group. The mean duration of urinary catheterization decreased by 5.5 days as did the number of patients lost to follow-up (32% vs 76%), without decreasing the successful voiding (46% vs 36%). The duration of the urinary catheterization was not related to the chance of successful voiding regardless of the urine volume and a drainage time of over 10 days significantly reduced the chance of success (68%, n = 26 versus 42%, n = 76; P = 0.0038). CONCLUSION: The implementation of a clinical pathway for AUR reduced the number of patients lost to follow-up and the catheterization duration, thus optimizing the management of these patients.

Juxta-adrenal schwannoma presenting as a giant adrenal tumor: A case report and a literature review.

INTRODUCTION: Retroperitoneal schwannomas (RS) are rare, benign tumors that originate in the neural sheath. Juxta-adrenal schwannomas may be misdiagnosed with giant adrenal tumors. This article reports the case of a RS that presented as an asymptomatic adrenal mass in a 50 Y.O female. PRESENTATION OF CASE: An abdominal ultrasound of our asymptomatic patient showed right adrenal lesion of 9 cm of diameter. Endocrinological evaluation was negative. The patient was considered to have a non-secreting right adrenal mass confirmed by adrenal scan. We began a right laparoscopic trans peritoneal adrenalectomy, but when we discovered intra operatively that the wall of the IVC and the renal vein were very adherent to the mass which had a lot of small vessels that were bleeding, we converted to open surgery that allowed us to remove the mass safely. The operative time was 200 min, the blood loss was 850 cc and the patient was discharged uneventfully on the sixth day after surgery. DISCUSSION: Although we thought that we removed a huge adrenal tumor from the retroperitoneum of our patient, the pathological exam revealed a RS that comprises the adrenal gland which was normal. Preoperative establishment of diagnosis is difficult in case of RS that can be misdiagnosed, especially when they stick to other structures (the adrenal in our case). CONCLUSION: Complete surgical resection is the treatment of choice for RS and open surgery is the safest option when we have big tumors. Histology and Immunohistochemistry confirms the diagnosis that can be easily missed preoperatively.

Improved decision making in intermediate-risk prostate cancer: a multicenter study on pathologic and oncologic outcomes after radical prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Prognoses for intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa) remain heterogeneous. Improved substratification could optimize treatment and monitoring strategies. The objective was to validate this subclassification in a radical prostatectomy (RP) series. METHODS: Between 2000 and 2011, 4038 patients who underwent RP for intermediate-risk PCa in seven French academic centers were included. Unfavorable intermediate-risk (UIR) PCa was defined as having a primary Gleason score of 4, ≥50% positive biopsy cores (PPBC), or more than one D'Amico intermediate-risk factor (i.e., cT2b, PSA 10-20, or Gleason score 7). Remaining PCa cases were classified as favorable. Main endpoints were pathologic results (pT stage, final Gleason score, surgical margin status), and oncologic outcomes were assessed according to PSA recurrence-free survival (PSA-RFS). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using the log-rank test and the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 48 months (95% CI = [45-49]). Patients with UIR had worse PSA-RFS (68.17 vs. 81.98% at 4 years, HR = 1.97, 95% CI = [1.71; 2.27], p < 0.0001) compared to those with a favorable disease. The need for adjuvant therapy was significantly greater for UIR patients (43.5 vs. 29.2%, p < 0.0001). In multivariate analysis, primary Gleason score of 4 (HR = 1.81, 95% CI = [1.55; 2.12], p < 0.0001) and PPBC ≥ 50% (HR = 1.26, 95% CI = [1.02; 1.56], p = 0.0286) were significant preoperative predictors for worse PSA-RFS. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the heterogeneity of NCCN intermediate-risk patients and validates (in a large RP cohort) the previously proposed subclassification for this group. This classification can significantly predict both pathologic and oncologic outcomes. This easy-to-use stratification could help physicians' decision making. Prospective study and new tools as genomic tests and novel molecular-based approaches can improve this stratification in the future for patient counseling.