Nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infection in urology departments: Results of a prospective multicentric study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the coronavirus disease 2019 perioperative infection rate and mortality rate of patients undergoing urological surgeries during the early pandemic period in Spain. METHODS: This was a non-interventional multicenter prospective study carried out from 9 March to 3 May 2020 in two urology departments in Madrid, Spain. Clinical, microbiological and radiological data of patients who underwent surgery were collected from computerized medical records. RESULTS: A total of 148 patients were included in the study, and 141 were analyzed for nosocomial infection risk, after excluding previous and concomitant severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 infections. Elective surgeries represented 76.6% of the procedures, whereas emergent surgeries represented 23.4%. Preoperative screening was carried out with polymerase chain reaction test in 34 patients, all were negative. A total of 14 patients also had chest X-ray (not suspicious in all cases). Three patients (2.1%) developed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 nosocomial infection (symptoms developed between the third day after surgery to the 14th day after hospital discharge). Time from admission to a compatible clinical case was 5.5 days (4-12 days). Two patients underwent surgery with concomitant diagnosis of coronavirus disease. The mortality rate due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 infection is 0.7%, and the specific mortality rate in patients undergoing surgery with community-acquired coronavirus disease 2019 infection was 50% (1/2). CONCLUSIONS: The nosocomial severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 infection rate was low in patients undergoing urological surgical procedures during the peak of the pandemic in Madrid. With appropriate perioperative screening, urological surgical activity can be carried out in safety conditions.

Two-Port Approach Compared to Standard Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Two-port laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) using a multichannel platform through the umbilicus and one additional 10-mm in the right iliac fossa has been recently described. We compare the perioperative and early results of this technique with a cohort of patients simultaneously treated in our institution with four-port LRC and a 7 to 10 cm midline incision. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A matched-pair study comparing perioperative outcomes, postoperative visual analog pain scale (VAPS), and morbidity of two-port (n=30) and four-port (n=30) LRC. Preoperative and perioperative data analyzed and compared included demographics, type of urinary diversion, operative time, blood loss, transfusion requirements, decrease in serum hemoglobin, operative complications, analgesic needs, length of stay, number of nodes removed, and other pathologic information. Complications in the first 3 months were evaluated according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding patient age, gender, body-mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, Charlson comorbidity index, tumor stage, percent of positive nodes, positive margin rate, number of nodes retrieved, proportion of neobladders, secondary carcinoma in situ, incidental prostate cancer, or need of systemic chemotherapy. Median operative time was 20 minutes higher in the two-port procedure, but this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.2). Estimated blood loss and differential hemoglobin change were lower in the two-port technique (each p=0.03), but no difference was detected regarding the intraoperative or postoperative transfusion rate. Length of hospital stay was also equivalent. Differences were not observed either in the number or severity of complications. VAPS at days 2, 3, and 5 was significantly lower for two-port LRC (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Two-port LRC performed through an umbilical platform and an accessory 10-mm port seems technically equivalent to standard four-port LRC. Perioperative outcomes regarding hospital stay and complications are tantamount. Diminished blood loss and, especially, less postoperative pain favor the reduced-port approach in this complex urologic minimally invasive procedure.

Umbilical laparoendoscopic urological surgery with a novel reusable device.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to present cumulative experience with umbilical laparoendoscopic urological surgery using a reusable device and to evaluate outcomes and complications in the first 100 patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients undergoing umbilical surgery with the KeyPort system and DuoRotate instruments (Richard Wolf, Knittlingen, Germany) were evaluated prospectively. Demographic, intraoperative and postoperative data were assessed. RESULTS: Between October 2011 and July 2012, 79 pelvic (66 radical prostatectomy, 10 radical cystectomy, one diverticulectomy, one bilateral orchiectomy, one ureter reimplantation) and 21 renal (seven radical nephrectomy, six partial nephrectomy, five nephroureterectomy, two pyeloplasty, one pyelolithotomy) surgeries were performed through the umbilicus using this platform. Follow-up was 56.7 ± 12.6 weeks (mean ± SD). Mean age was 64.3 ± 10.3 years, body mass index 29 ± 4.6 kg/m(2), operative time 232 ± 106 min and estimated blood loss 260 ± 95 ml. Conversion to standard multiport laparoscopy was not necessary. An accessory port was used in 87 cases to facilitate suturing and conduct drainage extraction. Postoperative complications occurred in 24 cases (six Clavien grade I, 12 grade II, one grade IIIa, two grade IIIb, two grade IVa, one grade IVb). Mean hospital stay was 4.2 ± 4 days. Total transfusion rate was 10%. Mean visual analogue pain scale at day 2 was 2.1 ± 1.3 (0-10). Visual analogue wound satisfaction scale at month 1 was 9.2 ± 0.6 (0-10). No cancer-related events occurred during follow-up. Late complications (4%) were not related to the surgical approach. CONCLUSIONS: Umbilical KeyPort surgery is technically feasible for a great variety of procedures, both ablative and reconstructive. This access offers adequate surgical outcomes, scarce postoperative pain and security for the patient in the short term. Its reusable nature implies a noticeable economic advantage.