ABSTRACT
The ureteral insertion of a silicone tube was first performed in 1967. A validated ureteral stent symptom questionnaire (USSQ) is used for an objective assessment of patient-reported stent-related symptoms. As the impact of stent diameter on the incidence of stent-related symptoms is unclear, we aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing USSQ reported outcomes when using a 6 Fr diameter ureteric stent, versus smaller diameter stents (4.7-5 Fr) when inserted for ureteric stones. All randomized control trials and comparative studies of 6 Fr versus 4.7-5 Fr ureteric stents were reviewed. The USSQ outcomes were considered as the primary outcome measures while stent migration was considered as a secondary outcome measure. A total of 61 articles were identified of which four studies met the eligibility criteria. There was a statistically significant association between the use of wider (6 Fr) diameter stents and the incidence of urinary symptoms as measured by the urinary index score. Larger stent diameters were associated with a statistically significant increase in the pain index score. There was no statistically significant difference in the scores between the compared stent diameters with regard to work performance score, general health index score, additional problems index score, and stent migration. There were insufficient reported outcomes to perform a meta-analysis of sexual matters index score. Our meta-analysis shows that using smaller diameter ureteric stents is associated with reduced urinary symptoms and patient-reported pain. Other USSQ parameter outcomes are statistically similar in the 6 Fr ureteric stent cohort versus the 4.7-5 Fr ureteric stent cohort. Our meta-analysis was limited due to the limited number of studies and gross heterogeneity of reporting parameters in various studies. We hope a large-scale homogeneous randomized control trial will further shed more insight into the stent symptoms response to stent diameter.
ABSTRACT
Globally, the prevalence of urolithiasis is increasing, with limited effective treatment options. Though debate exists within the literature, the use of medical expulsive therapy (MET) for distal ureteric stones in the form of alpha-blockers is commonplace. Alpha-blockers work via the inhibition of norepinephrine, resulting in a small degree of distal ureteric relaxation. Nitric oxide (NO), the main neurotransmitter involved in penile erection, causes smooth muscle relaxation of the distal ureter. It is hypothesised that these alternative pathways may achieve the same desire clinical effect. To our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of male sexual activity, in the form of intercourse or masturbation, to alpha-blockers in the expulsion of ureteric stones. We conducted a comprehensive search of electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, CENTRAL and Google Scholar), identifying studies comparing male sexual activity versus alpha-blockers, in male patients with distal ureteric stones. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess the included studies. For data analysis, a random effects model was used in the event of significant heterogeneity (>75%), with fixed-effects modelling in the event of low-moderate heterogeneity. A search of electronic databases found three randomised control trials (RCTs), enrolling a total of 262 patients. There was no statistically significant difference observed when patients engaged in sexual activity rather than alpha-blocker, when looking at stone expulsion rate at two weeks (P=0.36), expulsion rate at four weeks (P=0.57), or the mean stone expulsion time (P=0.21). Furthermore, there was no significant difference observed when looking at analgesic requirements (P=0.43), or the requirement for additional procedures (P=0.57). Our meta-analysis demonstrated that male sexual activity as an alternative therapy for distal ureteric stones had comparable outcomes to the use of alpha-blocker, proving a viable alternative therapy in those patients wishing to avoid pharmacological management.
ABSTRACT
Aims: To investigate whether spinal anesthesia with an obturator nerve block (SA+ONB) can be effectively used for transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic to improve patient outcomes while also avoiding aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs). We aimed to compare outcomes of TURBTs using spinal anesthesia (SA) alone vs SA+ONB in terms of rates of obturator reflex, bladder perforation, incomplete tumor resection, tumor recurrence, and local anesthetic toxicity. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search of electronic databases (MEDLINE, PUBMED, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, SCOPUS, Google Scholar, and Web of Science), identifying studies comparing the outcomes of TURBT using SA vs spinal with an ONB. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies were used to assess the included studies. Random effects modeling was used to calculate pooled outcome data. Results: Four RCTs and three cohort studies were identified, enrolling a total of 448 patients. The use of SA+ONB was associated with a significantly reduced risk of obturator reflex (p < 0.00001), bladder perforation (p = 0.02), incomplete resection (p < 0.0001), and 12-month tumor recurrence (p = 0.005). ONB was not associated with an increased risk of local anesthetic toxicity (0/159). Conclusion: Our meta-analysis suggests that TURBT using SA+ONB is superior to the use of SA alone. During the COVID-19 pandemic, where avoidance of AGPs such as a general anesthesia is paramount, the use of an ONB with SA is essential for the safety of both patients and staff without compromising care. Further high-quality RCTs with adequate sample sizes are required to compare the different techniques of ONB as well as comparing this method with general anesthesia with complete neuromuscular blockade.
Subject(s)
Anesthesia, Spinal , Nerve Block , Obturator Nerve , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Aerosols , Anesthesia, Spinal/adverse effects , COVID-19 , Humans , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Nerve Block/adverse effects , Pandemics , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/surgeryABSTRACT
Aims: To compare outcomes of monopolar vs bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in the management of exclusively moderate-large volume prostatic hyperplasia in terms of maximum flow rate as a surrogate for clinical efficacy, duration of catheterization, hospital stay, operative time, resection weight, transurethral resection (TUR) syndrome, acute urinary retention (AUR), clot retention, and blood transfusion. Methods: We conducted a search of electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL), identifying studies comparing the outcomes of monopolar and bipolar TURP in the management of large-volume prostatic hyperplasia. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies were used to assess included studies. Random effects modeling was used to calculate pooled outcome data. Results: Three RCTs and four observational studies were identified, enrolling 496 patients. No difference was observed in the clinical efficacy between each procedure at 3 months postoperatively (p = 0.99), 6 months (p = 0.46), and 12 months (p = 0.29). The use of bipolar TURP was associated with significantly shorter inpatient stay (p = 0.01) and a shorter duration of catheterization (p = 0.05). Monopolar TURP was associated with an increased risk of TUR syndrome (p = 0.03). Operative time (p = 0.58), resection weight (p = 0.16), AUR (p = 0.96), clot retention (p = 0.79), and blood transfusion (p = 0.39) were similar in both groups. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that bipolar TURP in the treatment of moderate-large volume prostatic disease may be associated with a significantly lower rate of TUR syndrome and shortened length of hospital stay, with similar efficacy when compared with monopolar TURP. Further high-quality RCTs with adequate sample sizes are required to compare both monopolar and bipolar TURP to open prostatectomy or laser enucleation in the treatment of exclusively large-volume prostates with stricter definition of size.
