Botulinum toxin for treating overactive bladder in men: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: We sought to systematically review the literature on the use of botulinum toxin (BTX-A) injections in the bladder to treat overactive bladder (OAB) in men. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review was performed to identify clinical trials on efficacy and safety of BTX-A injections in the detrusor for treatment of OAB in men published from inception to October 2020. Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias and study characteristics were extracted by two reviewers independently. RESULTS: After screening 75 abstracts, 12 trials were included in the qualitative synthesis, of which 6 were conducted exclusively in men (mean age: 66.7 years). Only two were randomized controlled studies and the remaining were observational studies, mostly case series. Total number of participants in each study ranged from 28 to 146. Therapeutic response to intravesical BTX-A injection was assessed differently across the studies, which used quality-of-life symptom questionnaires and voiding diary parameters. Urodynamics findings were reported separately for men before and after intravesical injection of BTX-A in two studies only. Pooling of outcome data was possible with adverse events reported after BTX-A by seven studies, which showed urinary tract infection, urinary retention, increased postvoid residual, de novo interstitial cystitis, and hematuria rates of 29.8%, 20.0%, 37.3%, 28.3%, and 12.4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Limited information regarding the efficacy and safety of BTX-A bladder injections for male OAB from relatively low evidence is available. Further research is needed to better understand the risk-benefit profile of BTX-A in the male population.

Systematic review of perioperative and quality-of-life outcomes following surgical management of localised renal cancer.

CONTEXT: For the treatment of localised renal cell carcinoma (RCC), uncertainties remain over the perioperative and quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes for the many different surgical techniques and approaches of nephrectomy. Controversy also remains on whether newer minimally invasive nephron-sparing interventions offer better QoL and perioperative outcomes, and whether adrenalectomy and lymphadenectomy should be performed simultaneously with nephrectomy. These non-oncological outcomes are important because they may have a considerable impact on localised RCC treatment decision making. OBJECTIVE: To review systematically all the relevant published literature comparing perioperative and QoL outcomes of surgical management of localised RCC (T1-2N0M0). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Relevant databases including Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched up to January 2012. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-randomised controlled trials, prospective observational studies with controls, retrospective matched-pair studies, and comparative studies from well-defined registries/databases were included. The outcome measures were QoL, analgesic requirement, length of hospital stay, time to normal activity level, surgical morbidity and complications, ischaemia time, renal function, blood loss, length of operation, need for blood transfusion, and perioperative mortality. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess RCTs, and an extended version was used to assess nonrandomised studies (NRSs). The quality of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 4580 abstracts and 380 full-text articles were assessed, and 29 studies met the inclusion criteria (7 RCTs and 22 NRSs). There were high risks of bias and low-quality evidence for studies meeting the inclusion criteria. There is good evidence indicating that partial nephrectomy results in better preservation of renal function and better QoL outcomes than radical nephrectomy regardless of technique or approach. Regarding radical nephrectomy, the laparoscopic approach has better perioperative outcomes than the open approach, and there is no evidence of a difference between the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches. Alternatives to standard laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) such as hand-assisted, robot-assisted, or single-port techniques appear to have similar perioperative outcomes. There is no good evidence to suggest that minimally invasive procedures such as cryotherapy or radiofrequency ablation have superior perioperative or QoL outcomes to nephrectomy. Regarding concomitant lymphadenectomy during nephrectomy, there were low event rates for complications, and no definitive difference was observed. There was no evidence to base statements about concomitant ipsilateral adrenalectomy during nephrectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Partial nephrectomy results in significantly better preservation of renal function over radical nephrectomy. For tumours where partial nephrectomy is not technically feasible, there is no evidence that alternative procedures or techniques are better than LRN in terms of perioperative or QoL outcomes. In making treatment decisions, perioperative and QoL outcomes should be considered in conjunction with oncological outcomes. Overall, there was a paucity of data regarding QoL outcomes, and when reported, both QoL and perioperative outcomes were inconsistently defined, measured, or reported. The current evidence base has major limitations due to studies of low methodological quality marked by high risks of bias.

Systematic review of oncological outcomes following surgical management of localised renal cancer.

CONTEXT: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) accounts for 2-3% of adult malignancies. There remain uncertainties over the oncological outcomes for the surgical management of localised RCC. OBJECTIVE: Systematically review relevant literature comparing oncological outcomes of surgical management of localised RCC (T1-2N0M0). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Relevant databases including Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched up to October 2010, and an updated scoping search was performed up to January 2012. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs, prospective observational studies with controls, retrospective matched-pair studies, and comparative studies from well-defined registries/databases were included. The main outcomes were overall survival, cancer-specific survival, recurrence, and metastases. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess RCTs, and an extended version was used to assess nonrandomised studies (NRSs). The quality of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 4580 abstracts and 389 full-text articles were assessed. Thirty-four studies met the inclusion criteria (6 RCTs and 28 NRSs). Meta-analyses were planned but were deemed inappropriate due to data heterogeneity. There were high risks of bias and low-quality evidence across the evidence base. Open radical nephrectomy and open partial nephrectomy showed similar cancer-specific and overall survival, but when both open and laparoscopic approaches are considered together, the evidence showed improved survival for partial nephrectomy for tumours ≤4cm. The overall evidence suggests either equivalent or better survival with partial nephrectomy. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy offered equivalent survival to open radical nephrectomy, and all laparoscopic approaches achieved equivalent survival. Open and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy achieved equivalent survival. The issue of ipsilateral adrenalectomy or complete lymph node dissection with radical nephrectomy or partial nephrectomy remains unresolved. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence base suggests localised RCCs are best managed by nephron-sparing surgery where technically feasible. However, the current evidence base has significant limitations due to studies of low methodological quality marked by high risks of bias.

Exporting simulation technology to the Philippines: a comparative study of traditional versus simulation methods for teaching intravenous cannulation.

This study examines effectiveness of a donated Laerdal Virtual I.V. simulator when compared with traditional methods of teaching intravenous (IV) cannulation to third year medical students in the Philippines. Forty novice Filipino medical students viewed an instructional video on how to start intravenous lines and were then randomly divided into two groups of twenty. The "Traditional" group observed an IV insertion on an actual patient performed by an experienced practitioner, and then subsequently performed an IV on an actual patient which was videotaped. The "Simulation" group practiced the Virtual I.V. simulator until they successfully completed level three using the "doctor" setting. These students then performed an IV on an actual patient which was videotaped. The videotapes for both groups were reviewed by two pre-trained (Inter-rater reliability of > or =0.84) observers who were blinded to the group using a previously validated checklist for IV insertion. Students trained on the Virtual I.V. showed significantly greater success in successfully starting an IV on an actual patient (40% VS. 15%, p<0.05), decreased constrictive band time (p<.05), increased raw score on the check list (p<.03), and decreased overall time to start an IV (p<.05). The technology was well received but wider application in the non western world is limited by lack of in country company support and the relative expense.