Concurrent two surgeon approach for bilateral synchronous percutaneous nephrolithotomy: Initial experience at a University Teaching Hospital.

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) has long been considered the bench-mark intervention for complicated urinary stones and has undergone important advancements since it was first described. Given the proven safety and efficacy of PNL, simultaneous bilateral PNL has been attempted for bilateral renal calculi to cut down on total procedure costs. To further cut down on operative time, concurrent bilateral synchronous PNL (BS-PNL) has been performed involving two surgeons, each operating concurrently on one renal unit. We performed a retrospective study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of BS-PNL in patients who consented for the procedure. Mean operative time taken from percutaneous access to skin closure was 78 min which was lower than that taken during the single surgeon approach for simultaneous bilateral PNL. Two (12%) out of 16 renal units required multiple punctures for stone clearance. Sheath size varied between 26Fr to 30Fr depending on the stone burden. Mean duration of hospital stay was 2 days. Fourteen (88%) out of 16 renal units had complete stone clearance. Fifteen (94%) out of 16 renal units had a double J stent placed for drainage. Only two patients had complications in the form of postoperative fever. In the background of already proven safety and efficacy of SB-PNL, the concurrent two surgeon approach appears to be feasible and safe with additional advantage of reduced operative time. However, the number of patients in this series were limited and a bigger and preferably multi-institutional study would be required before we can come to a definitive conclusion.

Outcomes and Complications from a Randomized Controlled Study Comparing Conventional Stent Placement Versus No Stent Placement after Ureteroscopy for Distal Ureteric Calculus < 1 cm

Ureteric stent insertion following ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL) is a common and widely accepted procedure. However, there is no agreement on whether a ureteric stent should be placed following an uncomplicated URSL. Furthermore, the definition of uncomplicated URSL remains debatable. To compare the efficacy, safety, and morbidity of no stent placement with the conventional stent placement after uncomplicated retrograde semirigid URS for a distal ureteric calculus of size ≤1 cm, we compared the corresponding complication rates, emergency visits, secondary interventions, and pain at follow-up. Following an uncomplicated ureteroscopic lithotripsy, 104 patients were randomized into the conventional stented group (CSG) and nonstented group (NSG). Lower urinary tract symptoms and sexual function were evaluated using validated questionnaires (IPSS + IIEF-5 + MSHQ-EjD/FSFI) preoperatively and at 4 weeks during follow-up. Pain scores at follow-up were recorded using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Patients who visited the emergency room or needed secondary interventions before the recommended follow-up time were noted. The Generalized Estimating Equations method was used to explore the difference in change in the domains of IPSS, IIEF-5, MSHQ-EjD, and FSFI between the two groups over time. A significant difference was noted in the following IPSS domains: Frequency, Urgency, Nocturia, Storage Symptoms, Total IPSS Score (p ≤ 0.001), and QoL (p = 0.002); IIEF-5 domains: Overall Score (p = 0.004); MSHQ-EjD domains: Ejaculation Bother/Satisfaction (p ≤ 0.001); and FSFI domains: Lubrication (p ≤ 0.001), Satisfaction (p = 0.006), and Overall Score (p = 0.004). There was no significant difference between the various groups in terms of distribution of emergency visits, readmission and secondary interventions, pain at follow-up (VAS), and need for long-term analgesia. Nonplacement of stents after uncomplicated URS decreases stent-related symptoms and preserves QoL without placing the patient under increased postoperative risk.

Telemedicine and Telehealth in Urology: Uptake, Impact and Barriers to Clinical Adoption.

Telemedicine has great potential in urology as a strong medium for providing patients with continuous high-quality urological care despite the hurdles involved in its implementation. Both clinicians and patients are crucial factors in determining the success of tele-consults in terms of simplicity of use and overall satisfaction. For it to be successfully incorporated into routine urological practice, rigorous training and evidence-based recommendations are lacking. If these issues are addressed, they can provide a significant impetus for future tele-consults in urology and their successful deployment, even beyond the pandemic, to assure safer and more environment-friendly patient management.

Super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP) vs retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in the management of renal calculi ≤ 2 cm: a propensity matched study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness and safety of Super-Mini PCNL (SMP) and Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery (RIRS) in the management of renal calculi ≤ 2 cm. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective, inter-institutional, observational study of patients presenting with renal calculi ≤ 2 cm. Patients underwent either SMP (Group 1) or RIRS (Group 2) and were performed by 2 experienced high-volume surgeons. RESULTS: Between September 2018 and April 2019, 593 patients underwent PCNL and 239 patients had RIRS in two tertiary centers. Among them, 149 patients were included for the final analysis after propensity-score matching out of which 75 patients underwent SMP in one center and 74 patients underwent RIRS in the other. The stone-free rate (SFR) was statistically significantly higher in Group 1 on POD-1 (98.66% vs. 89.19%; p = 0.015), and was still higher in Group 1 on POD-30 (98.66% vs. 93.24%, p = 0.092) SFR on both POD-1 and POD-30 for lower pole calculi was higher in Group 1 (100 vs. 82.61%, p = 0.047 and 100 vs 92.61% p = 0.171). The mean (SD) operative time was significantly shorter in Group 1 at 36.43 min (14.07) vs 51.15 (17.95) mins (p < 0.0001). The mean hemoglobin drop was significantly less in Group 1 (0.31 vs 0.53 gm%; p = 0.020). There were more Clavien-Dindo complications in Group 2 (p = 0.021). The mean VAS pain score was significantly less in Group 2 at 6 and 12 h postoperatively (2.52 vs 3.67, 1.85 vs 2.40, respectively: p < 0.0001), whereas the mean VAS pain score was significantly less in Group 1 at 24 h postoperatively (0.31 vs 1.01, p < 0.0001). The mean hospital stay was significantly shorter in Group 1 (28.37 vs 45.70 h; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: SMP has significantly lower operative times, complication rates, shorter hospital stay, with higher stone-free rates compared to RIRS. SMP is associated with more early post-operative pain though.

Use of ureteric stent related mobile phone application (UROSTENTZ App) in COVID-19 for improving patient communication and safety: a prospective pilot study from a university hospital.

INTRODUCTION: During the COVID-19 led lockdown, a reliable system to monitor ureteral stent insertion and timely removal became an important facet of their use. This study looks at the use of 'Urostentz' smartphone application (app) for stent procedures and whether it improved patient communication and safety during the lockdown. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The 'Urostentz' app was used for patients who underwent ureteric stent after ureteroscopy (URS) or percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) procedure. It is a smartphone app developed to improve patient safety, facilitate data collection, and provide an efficient interface to simplify ureteral stent tracking and patient communication. It also helps clinicians track stent-related symptoms (SRS) and provide digital remote assistance. RESULTS: A total of 33 patients registered with a mean age of 47.8 years (range:18-80) and a male: female ratio of 4.5:1. Of these, 29 (87.9%) used the Urostentz app, and 55.2% had SRS. The number of effective communication episodes ranged from 1-7/patient. Based on the symptoms and communication, stent was removed during lockdown (n = 2), within 1 week of lockdown lifted (n = 24) and within 2 weeks of lockdown lifted (n = 5). None of the patients suffered any stent-related complications and there were no cases of forgotten stents or readmissions despite the lockdown and lack of communication using standard practices. CONCLUSIONS: The Urostentz app proved to an effective medium of communication to provide guidance and personalized digital remote healthcare. It also allowed prompt removal of stents avoiding prolonged stent symptoms or forgotten stents. Such apps can have a much wider application in the post-COVID-19-era to reduce unnecessary post-procedural visits and reduce health care costs.