Percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones: a Cochrane Review.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) vs retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the treatment of renal stones in adults. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, trials registries, other sources of the grey literature, and conference proceedings up to 23 March 2023. We applied no restrictions on publication language or status. Screening, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment, and certainty of evidence (CoE) rating using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach were done in duplicate by two independent reviewers. This co-publication focuses on the primary outcomes of this review only. RESULTS: We included 42 trials that met the inclusion criteria. Stone-free rate (SFR): PCNL may improve SFRs (risk ratio [RR] 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.18; I2 = 71%; 39 studies, 4088 participants; low CoE). Major complications: PCNL probably has little to no effect on major complications (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.59-1.25; I2 = 15%; 34 studies, 3649; participants; moderate CoE) compared to RIRS. Need for secondary interventions: PCNL may reduce the need for secondary interventions (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.17-0.55; I2 = 61%; 21 studies, 2005 participants; low CoE) compared to RIRS. CONCLUSION: Despite shortcomings in most studies that lowered our certainty in the estimates of effect to mostly very low or low, we found that PCNL may improve SFRs and reduce the need for secondary interventions while not impacting major complications. Ureteric stricture rates may be similar compared to RIRS. We expect the findings of this review to be helpful for shared decision-making about management choices for individuals with renal stones.

Tranexamic acid for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: an abridged Cochrane review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of tranexamic acid (TXA) in individuals with kidney stones undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a literature search of Cochrane Library, PubMed (including MEDLINE), Embase, Scopus, Global Index Medicus, trials registries, grey literature, and conference proceedings. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared treatment with PCNL with administration of TXA to placebo (or no TXA) for patients aged ≥18 years. Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data. Primary outcomes were blood transfusion, stone-free rate (SFR), thromboembolic events (TEE). We rated the certainty of evidence (CoE) according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach using a minimally contextualised approach with pre-defined thresholds for minimally clinically important differences (MCID). RESULTS: We included 10 RCTs assessing the effect of systemic TXA in PCNL vs placebo (or no TXA). Eight studies were published as full text. Based on an adjusted baseline risk of blood transfusion of 5.7%, systemic TXA may reduce blood transfusions (risk ratio [RR] 0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.27-0.76). Based on an adjusted baseline SFR of 75.7%, systemic TXA may increase SFR (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.98-1.27). There is probably no difference in TEEs (risk difference 0.001, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01). Systemic TXA may increase adverse events (AEs) (RR 5.22, 95% CI 0.52-52.72). Systemic TXA may have little to no effect on secondary interventions (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.84-1.57). The CoE for most outcomes was assessed as low or very low. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a body of evidence of 10 RCTs, we found that systemic TXA in PCNL may reduce blood transfusions, major surgical complications, and hospital length of stay, as well as improve the SFR; however, it may increase AEs. These findings should inform urologists and their patients in making informed decisions about the use of TXA in the setting of PCNL.

Prospective Multicenter Evaluation of Pain Before and After Removal of Nonobstructing Renal Calculi: A CoRE Initiative.

PURPOSE: Flank pain associated with stone disease is typically caused by a stone that obstructs urine flow. However, it is plausible that nonobstructing kidney stones may still cause pain. We performed a multicenter, observational trial to evaluate whether treatment of small nonobstructing calyceal stones improves pain and kidney stone-specific health-related quality of life. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients aged 18 years or older with nonobstructing renal stone(s) up to 10 mm in longest diameter and moderate to severe pain were recruited. All participants completed 3 questionnaires: the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System pain interference form 6a, and the Wisconsin Stone Quality of Life questionnaire. Thereafter, all participants underwent ureteroscopy for renal stone treatment. All 3 questionnaires were repeated at 2, 6 to 8, and at 12 weeks postprocedure. The primary outcomes were change in preoperative to 12-week postoperative mean BPI score and worst BPI pain score. RESULTS: A total of 43 patients with nonobstructing kidney stones and associated flank pain were recruited. All stones were removed. Preoperatively, BPI scores for mean pain and worst pain were 5.5 and 7.2, respectively which decreased to 1.8 and 2.8 respectively at 12 weeks postoperatively. Wisconsin Stone Quality of Life questionnaire mean score increased from 70.4 to 115.3 at 12 weeks postoperatively. A total of 86% and 69% of patients had at least a 20% and 50% reduction in their mean pain scores, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study determined that patients benefit significantly from the removal of calyceal nonobstructing kidney stones for at least 12 weeks with a reduction in pain and an increase in quality of life. Therefore, surgical removal of these stones in this patient population should be offered as a treatment option.

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones in adults.

BACKGROUND: Kidney stones (also called renal stones) can be a source of pain, obstruction, and infection. Depending on size, location, composition, and other patient factors, the treatment of kidney stones can involve observation, shock wave lithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS; i.e. ureteroscopic approaches), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), or a combination of these approaches. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the treatment of renal stones in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and two trials registries up to 23 March 2023. We applied no restrictions on publication language or status. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials that evaluated PCNL (grouped by access size in French gauge [Fr] into three groups: ≥ 24 Fr [standard PCNL], 15-23 Fr [mini-PCNL and minimally invasive PCNL], and < 15 Fr [ultra-mini-, mini-micro-, super-mini-, and micro-PCNL]) versus RIRS. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data from the included studies. Our primary outcomes were stone-free rate, major complications, and need for secondary interventions. Our main secondary outcomes were unplanned medical visits to emergency/urgent care or outpatient clinic, length of hospital stay, ureteral stricture or injury, and quality of life. We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model. We rated the certainty of evidence using GRADE criteria. We adopted a minimally contextualized approach with predefined thresholds for minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs). MAIN RESULTS: We included 42 trials assessing the effects of PCNL versus RIRS in 4571 randomized participants. Twenty-two studies were published as full-text articles, and 20 were published as abstract proceedings. The average size of stones ranged from 10.1 mm to 39.1 mm. Most studies did not report sources of funding or conflicts of interest. The main results for the most important outcomes are summarized below. Stone-free rate PCNL compared with RIRS may improve stone-free rates (risk ratio [RR] 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08 to 1.18; I2 = 71%; 39 studies, 4088 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on 770 participants per 1000 being stone-free with RIRS, this corresponds to 100 more (62 more to 139 more) stone-free participants per 1000 with PCNL (an absolute difference of 10%, where the predefined MCID was 5%). Major complications PCNL compared with RIRS probably has little or no effect on major complications (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.25; I2 = 15%; 34 studies, 3649 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on 31 complications in the RIRS group, this corresponds to six fewer (13 fewer to six more) major complications per 1000 with PCNL (an absolute difference of 0.6%, where the predefined MCID was 2%). Need for secondary interventions PCNL compared with RIRS may reduce the need for secondary interventions (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.55; I2 = 61%; 21 studies, 2005 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on 222 secondary interventions in the RIRS group, this corresponds to 153 fewer (185 fewer to 100 fewer) secondary interventions per 1000 with PCNL (an absolute difference of 15.3%, where the predefined MCID was 5%). Unplanned medical visits No studies reported unplanned medical visits. Length of hospital stay PCNL compared with RIRS may extend length of hospital stay (mean difference 1.04 days more, 95% CI 0.27 more to 1.81 more; I2 = 100%; 26 studies, 2804 participants; low-certainty evidence). This effect size is greater than the predefined MCID of one day. Ureteral stricture or injury PCNL compared with RIRS may have little or no effect on the occurrence of ureteral strictures (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.39 to 2.21; I2 = 0%; 13 studies, 1574 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on 14 ureteral strictures in the RIRS group, this corresponds to one fewer (nine fewer to 17 more) ureteral strictures per 1000 with PCNL (an absolute difference of 0.1%, where the predefined MCID was 2%). Quality of life No studies reported quality of life. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on a large body of evidence from 42 trials, we found that PCNL compared with RIRS may improve stone-free rates and may reduce the need for secondary interventions, but probably has little or no effect on major complications. PCNL compared with RIRS may have little or no effect on ureteral stricture rates and may increase length of hospital stay. We found no evidence on unplanned medical visits or participant quality of life. Because of the considerable shortcomings of the included trials, the evidence for most outcomes was of low certainty. Access size for PCNL was less than 24 Fr in most studies that provided this information. We expect the findings of this review to be helpful for shared decision-making about management choices for individuals with renal stones.

Tranexamic acid for percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the gold standard for the treatment of large kidney stones but comes with an increased risk of bleeding compared to other treatments, such as ureteroscopy and shock wave lithotripsy. Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an antifibrinolytic agent that has been used to reduce bleeding complications in other settings. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of TXA in individuals with kidney stones undergoing PCNL. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search of the Cochrane Library, PubMed (including MEDLINE), Embase, Scopus, Global Index Medicus, trials registries, other sources of the grey literature, and conference proceedings. We applied no restrictions on the language of publication nor publication status. The latest search date was 11 May 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared treatment with PCNL with administration of TXA to placebo (or no TXA) for patients ≥ 18 years old. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data. Primary outcomes were: blood transfusion, stone-free rate (SFR), and thromboembolic events (TEEs). Secondary outcomes were: adverse events (AEs), secondary interventions, major surgical complications, minor surgical complications, unplanned hospitalizations or readmissions, and hospital length of stay (LOS). We performed statistical analyzes using a random-effects model. We rated the certainty of evidence (CoE) according to the GRADE approach using a minimally contextualized approach with predefined thresholds for minimally clinically important differences (MCIDs). MAIN RESULTS: We analyzed 10 RCTs assessing the effect of systemic TXA in PCNL versus placebo (or no TXA) with 1883 randomized participants. Eight studies were published as full text. One was published in abstract proceedings, but it was separated into two separate studies for the purpose of our analyzes. Average stone surface area ranged 3.45 to 6.62 cm2. We also found a single RCT published in full text assessing the effects of topical TXA in PCNL versus placebo (or no TXA) with 400 randomized participants, the results of which are further described in the review. Here we focus only on the results of TXA used systemically. Blood transfusion - Based on a representative baseline risk of 5.7% for blood transfusions taken from a large presentative observational studies, systemic TXA may reduce blood transfusions (risk ratio (RR) 0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.76; I2 = 28%; 9 studies, 1353 participants; low CoE). We assumed an MCID of ≥ 2%. Based on 57 participants per 1000 with placebo (or no TXA) being transfused, this corresponds to 31 fewer (from 42 fewer to 14 fewer) participants being transfused per 1000. Stone-free rate - Based on a representative baseline risk of 75.7% for SFR, systemic TXA may increase SFRs (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.27; I2 = 62%; 4 studies, 603 participants; low CoE). We assumed an MCID of ≥ 5%. Based on 757 participants per 1000 being stone free with placebo (or no TXA), this corresponds to 83 more (from 15 fewer to 204 more) stone-free participants per 1000. Thromboembolic events - There is probably no difference in TEEs (risk difference (RD) 0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01; I2 = 0%; 6 studies, 841 participants; moderate CoE). We assumed an MCID of ≥ 2%. Since there were no thromboembolic events in intervention and/or control groups in 5 out of6 studies, we opted to assess a risk difference with systemic TXA for this outcome. Adverse events - Systemic TXA may increase AEs (RR 5.22, 95% CI 0.52 to 52.72; I2 = 75%; 4 studies, 602 participants; low CoE). We assumed an MCID of ≥ 5%. Based on 23 participants per 1000 with placebo (or no TXA) having an adverse event, this corresponds to 98 more (from 11 fewer to 1000 more) participants with adverse events per 1000. Secondary interventions - Systemic TXA may have little to no effect on secondary interventions (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.57; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 319 participants; low CoE). We assumed an MCID of ≥ 5%. Based on 278 participants per 1000 with placebo (or no TXA) having a secondary intervention, this corresponds to 42 more (from 44 fewer to 158 more) participants with secondary interventions per 1000. Major surgical complications - Based on a representative baseline risk for major surgical complications of 4.1%, systemic TXA may reduce major surgical complications (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.62; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 733 participants; moderate CoE). We assumed an MCID of ≥ 2%. Based on 41 participants per 1000 with placebo (or no TXA) having a major surgical complication, this corresponds to 26 fewer (from 32 fewer to 16 fewer) participants with major surgical complications per 1000. Minor surgical complications - Systemic TXA may reduce minor surgical complications (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.10; I2 = 76%; 5 studies, 733 participants; low CoE). We assumed an MCID of ≥ 5%. Based on 396 participants per 1000 with placebo (or no TXA) having a minor surgical complication, this corresponds to 115 fewer (from 218 fewer to 40 more) participants with minor surgical complications per 1000. Unplanned hospitalizations or readmissions - We are very uncertain how unplanned hospitalizations or readmissions are affected (RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.45 to 5.31; I2 = not applicable; 1 study, 189 participants; very low CoE). We assumed an MCID of ≥ 2%. Hospital length of stay - Systemic TXA may reduce hospital LOS (mean difference 0.52 days lower, 95% CI 0.93 lower to 0.11 lower; I2 = 98%; 7 studies, 1151 participants; low CoE). We assumed an MCID of ≥ 0.5 days. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on 10 RCTs with substantial methodological limitations that lowered all CoE of effect, we found that systemic TXA in PCNL may reduce blood transfusions, major and minor surgical complications, and hospital LOS, as well as improve SFRs; however, it may increase AEs. We are uncertain about the effects of systemic TXA on other outcomes. Findings of this review should assist urologists and their patients in making informed decisions about the use of TXA in the setting of PCNL.

Development of a burst wave lithotripsy system for noninvasive fragmentation of ureteroliths in pet cats.

BACKGROUND: Upper urinary tract stones are increasingly prevalent in pet cats and are difficult to manage. Surgical procedures to address obstructing ureteroliths have short- and long-term complications, and medical therapies (e.g., fluid diuresis and smooth muscle relaxants) are infrequently effective. Burst wave lithotripsy is a non-invasive, ultrasound-guided, handheld focused ultrasound technology to disintegrate urinary stones, which is now undergoing human clinical trials in awake unanesthetized subjects. RESULTS: In this study, we designed and performed in vitro testing of a modified burst wave lithotripsy system to noninvasively fragment stones in cats. The design accounted for differences in anatomic scale, acoustic window, skin-to-stone depth, and stone size. Prototypes were fabricated and tested in a benchtop model using 35 natural calcium oxalate monohydrate stones from cats. In an initial experiment, burst wave lithotripsy was performed using peak ultrasound pressures of 7.3 (n = 10), 8.0 (n = 5), or 8.9 MPa (n = 10) for up to 30 min. Fourteen of 25 stones fragmented to < 1 mm within the 30 min. In a second experiment, burst wave lithotripsy was performed using a second transducer and peak ultrasound pressure of 8.0 MPa (n = 10) for up to 50 min. In the second experiment, 9 of 10 stones fragmented to < 1 mm within the 50 min. Across both experiments, an average of 73-97% of stone mass could be reduced to fragments < 1 mm. A third experiment found negligible injury with in vivo exposure of kidneys and ureters in a porcine animal model. CONCLUSIONS: These data support further evaluation of burst wave lithotripsy as a noninvasive intervention for obstructing ureteroliths in cats.

Prostatic arterial embolisation for men with benign prostatic hyperplasia: a Cochrane review.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of prostatic arterial embolisation (PAE) compared to other procedures for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), as well as non-randomised studies (NRSs) enrolling men with BPH undergoing PAE vs other surgical interventions via a comprehensive search up until 8 November 2021. Two independent reviewers screened the literature, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, performed statistical analyses by using a random-effects model, and rated the certainty of evidence (CoE) of RCTs and NRSs. RESULTS: We found data to inform two comparisons: PAE vs transurethral resection of prostate (TURP; six RCTs and two NRSs), and PAE vs sham (one RCT). This abstract focuses on the primary outcomes in a comparison of PAE vs TURP. Short-term follow-up: based on RCT evidence, there may be little to no difference in urological symptom score improvement (mean difference [MD] 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.37 to 3.81; low CoE) and quality of life (QoL; MD 0.28, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.84; low CoE) measured by International Prostatic Symptom Score. We are very uncertain about the effects of PAE on major adverse events (risk ratio [RR] 0.75, 95% CI 0.19-2.97; very low CoE). Long-term follow-up: based on RCT evidence, PAE may result in little to no difference in urological symptom scores (MD 2.58, 95% CI -1.54 to 6.71; low CoE) and QoL (MD 0.50, 95% CI -0.03 to 1.04; low CoE). We are very uncertain about major adverse events (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.20-4.05; very low CoE). CONCLUSION: Compared to TURP, the impact on urological symptoms and QoL improvement as perceived by patients appears to be similar. This review did reveal major uncertainty as to how major adverse events compare.

The Uniform grading tooL for flexIble ureterorenoscoPes (TULIP-tool): a Delphi consensus project on standardised evaluation of flexible ureterorenoscopes.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a standardised tool to evaluate flexible ureterorenoscopes (fURS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A three-stage consensus building approach based on the modified Delphi technique was performed under guidance of a steering group. First, scope- and user-related parameters used to evaluate fURS were identified through a systematic scoping review. Then, the main categories and subcategories were defined, and the expert panel was selected. Finally, a two-step modified Delphi consensus project was conducted to firstly obtain consensus on the relevance and exact definition of each (sub)category necessary to evaluate fURS, and secondly on the evaluation method (setting, used tools and unit of outcome) of those (sub)categories. Consensus was reached at a predefined threshold of 80% high agreement. RESULTS: The panel consisted of 30 experts in the field of endourology. The first step of the modified Delphi consensus project consisted of two questionnaires with a response rate of 97% (n = 29) for both. Consensus was reached for the relevance and definition of six main categories and 12 subcategories. The second step consisted of three questionnaires (response rate of 90%, 97% and 100%, respectively). Consensus was reached on the method of measurement for all (sub)categories. CONCLUSION: This modified Delphi consensus project reached consensus on a standardised grading tool for the evaluation of fURS - The Uniform grading tooL for flexIble ureterorenoscoPes (TULIP) tool. This is a first step in creating uniformity in this field of research to facilitate future comparison of outcomes of the functionality and handling of fURS.

Predicting Septic Shock After Emergent Ureteral Stenting in Stone-Related Obstruction and Presumed Infections.

Introduction: Systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria have long been used to predict septic shock. The sequential organ failure assessment and quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) scores have been suggested to be more accurate predictors. This study aims to compare SIRS and qSOFA for predicting of septic shock in the setting of retrograde ureteral stenting for obstructing stones and concomitant urinary tract infection. Methods: A retrospective review of records at two centers of consecutive patients was performed. Patients with unilateral ureteral obstruction by a stone who underwent ureteral stent placement and suspicion of urinary tract infection were identified. Primary endpoints were SIRS and qSOFA positive scores, intensive care unit admission, and vasopressor requirements. Results: A total of 187 patients were included. SIRS criteria were met in 103 patients (55.1%) and in 30 patients who experienced septic shock. qSOFA criteria were met for 24 patients (12.8%) and in 18 patients who experienced septic shock. Specificity for postoperative septic shock was significantly higher for qSOFA than for SIRS criteria (75 vs 29.1%, McNemar test p < 0.001). Both SIRS and qSOFA had significant areas under the curve (AUC), qSOFA had a fair AUC of 0.750, p = 0.001, whereas SIRS had a poor AUC of 0.659, p = 0.008. Univariate logistic regression of SIRS and qSOFA for septic shock showed: qSOFA (odds ratio [OR] 46 [0.25-228], p = 0.001) and SIRS (OR 2.29 [0.716-7.37], p = 0.162). Conclusion: Although SIRS offers higher sensitivity, qSOFA score may offer advantages over SIRS criteria in evaluation of risk for septic shock for patients who present with obstructing ureteral stone and urinary tract infection.

Heterogeneity in stone culture protocols and endourologist practice patterns: a multi-institutional survey.

Kidney stone cultures can be beneficial in identifying bacteria not detected in urine, yet how stone cultures are performed among endourologists, under what conditions, and by what laboratory methods remain largely unknown. Stone cultures are not addressed by current clinical guidelines. A comprehensive REDCap electronic survey sought responses from directed (n = 20) and listserv elicited (n = 108) endourologists specializing in kidney stone disease. Questions included which clinical scenarios prompt a stone culture order, how results influence post-operative antibiotics, and what microbiology lab protocols exist at each institution with respect to processing and resulting stone cultures. Logistic regression statistical analysis determined what factors were associated with performing stone cultures. Of 128 unique responses, 11% identified as female and the mean years of practicing was 16 (range 1-46). A specific 'stone culture' order was available to only 50% (64/128) of those surveyed, while 32% (41/128) reported culturing stone by placing a urine culture order. The duration of antibiotics given for a positive stone culture varied, with 4-7 days (46%) and 8-14 days (21%) the most reported. More years in practice was associated with fewer stone cultures ordered, while higher annual volume of percutaneous nephrolithotomy was associated with ordering more stone cultures (p < 0.01). Endourologists have differing practice patterns with respect to ordering stone cultures and utilizing the results to guide post-operative antibiotics. With inconsistent microbiology lab stone culture protocols across multiple institutions, more uniform processing is needed for future studies to assess the clinical benefit of stone cultures and direct future guidelines.

The 2023 Stone-Free CT Mandate: Addressing the Two Sides of the Debate.

To the editors of the Journal of Endourology, we write to express our reservations in the recent announcement that starting in 2023 all reporting of stone-free rates be based on CT.

Removal of Small, Asymptomatic Kidney Stones and Incidence of Relapse.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of removing small (≤6 mm), asymptomatic kidney stones endoscopically is unknown. Current guidelines leave such decisions to the urologist and the patient. A prospective study involving older, nonendoscopic technology and some retrospective studies favor observation. However, published data indicate that about half of small renal stones left in place at the time that larger stones were removed caused other symptomatic events within 5 years after surgery. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial in which, during the endoscopic removal of ureteral or contralateral kidney stones, remaining small, asymptomatic stones were removed in 38 patients (treatment group) and were not removed in 35 patients (control group). The primary outcome was relapse as measured by future emergency department visits, surgeries, or growth of secondary stones. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 4.2 years, the treatment group had a longer time to relapse than the control group (P<0.001 by log-rank test). The restricted mean (±SE) time to relapse was 75% longer in the treatment group than in the control group (1631.6±72.8 days vs. 934.2±121.8 days). The risk of relapse was 82% lower in the treatment group than the control group (hazard ratio, 0.18; 95% confidence interval, 0.07 to 0.44), with 16% of patients in the treatment group having a relapse as compared with 63% of those in the control group. Treatment added a median of 25.6 minutes (interquartile range, 18.5 to 35.2) to the surgery time. Five patients in the treatment group and four in the control group had emergency department visits within 2 weeks after surgery. Eight patients in the treatment group and 10 in the control group reported passing kidney stones. CONCLUSIONS: The removal of small, asymptomatic kidney stones during surgery to remove ureteral or contralateral kidney stones resulted in a lower incidence of relapse than nonremoval and in a similar number of emergency department visits related to the surgery. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and the Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02210650.).

Over-the-Counter Alkali Agents to Raise Urine pH and Citrate Excretion: A Prospective Crossover Study in Healthy Adults.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of 2 over-the-counter alkalizing agents on 24 hour urinary parameters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten healthy volunteers without a history of kidney stones were recruited to complete a baseline 24 hour urinalysis with a 4 day diet inventory. Participants then maintained the same diet on either LithoLyte (20 mEq 2 times per day) or KSPtabs (1 tablet 2 times per day) and submitted another 24 hour urinalysis. The process was repeated with the other supplement. Urinary alkali parameters were compared to baseline, and side effects were elicited with a questionnaire. RESULTS: LithoLyte intake resulted in a non-significant increase in citrate (597-758 mg/day, P =.058, an increase in urine pH (6.46-6.66, P =.028), and a decrease in urine ammonium (41-36 mmol/day, P =.005) compared to baseline. KSPtabs resulted in an increase in citrate (597-797 mg/day, P =.037) and urine pH (6.46-6.86, P =.037), with a non-significant decrease in ammonium (41-34 mmol/day, P =.059). No significant differences were seen comparing urinary analytes between LithoLyte and KSPtabs. With Litholyte, no side effects, mild, moderate, and severe side effects were seen in 50%, 40%, 10%, and 0%, respectively. With KSPtabs, rates were 60%, 20%, 10%, and 10%, respectively. CONCLUSION: In healthy participants without a history of kidney stones, LithoLyte and KSPtabs are effective over-the-counter alkali supplements, with a similar side effect profile to prescription potassium citrate.

Evaluation of the Educational Impact of the Urology Collaborative Online Video Didactics Lecture Series.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of the Urology Collaborative Online Video Didactic (COViD) lecture series series on resident knowledge as a supplement to resident education during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. METHODS: One hundred thirty-nine urology residents were voluntarily recruited from 8 institutions. A 20-question test, based on 5 COViD lectures, was administered before and after watching the lectures. Pre- and posttest scores (percent correct) and score changes (posttest minus pretest score) were assessed considering demographic data and number of lectures watched. Multiple linear regression determined predictors of improved scores. RESULTS: Of residents recruited, 95 and 71 took the pre- and posttests. Median number of lectures watched was 3. There was an overall increase in correct scores from pretest to posttest (45% vs 57%, P < .01). Watching any lectures vs none led to higher posttest scores (60% vs 44%, P < .01) and score changes (+16% vs +1%, P < .01). There was an increase in baseline pretest scores by post-graduate year (PGY) (P < .01); however there were no significant differences in posttest or score changes by PGY. When accounting for lectures watched, PGY, and time between lecture and posttest, being a PGY6 (P = .01) and watching 3-5 lectures (P < .01) had higher overall correct posttest scores. Watching 3-5 lectures led to greater score changes (P < .001-.04). Over 65% of residents stated the COViD lectures had a large or very large impact on their education. CONCLUSIONS: COViD lectures improved overall correct posttest scores and increased knowledge base for all resident levels. Furthermore, lectures largely impacted resident education during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Prostatic arterial embolization for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia.

BACKGROUND: A variety of minimally invasive surgical approaches are available as an alternative to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for management of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Prostatic arterial embolization (PAE) is a relatively new, minimally invasive treatment approach. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of PAE compared to other procedures for treatment of LUTS in men with BPH. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, trials registries, other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings with no restrictions on language of publication or publication status, up to 8 November 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs), as well as non-randomized studies (NRS, limited to prospective cohort studies with concurrent comparison groups) enrolling men over the age of 40 years with LUTS attributed to BPH undergoing PAE versus TURP or other surgical interventions.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently classified studies for inclusion or exclusion and abstracted data from the included studies. We performed statistical analyses by using a random-effects model and interpreted them according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We used GRADE guidance to rate the certainty of evidence of RCTs and NRSs.  MAIN RESULTS: We found data to inform two comparisons: PAE versus TURP (six RCTs and two NRSs), and PAE versus sham (one RCT). Mean age was 66 years, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) was 22.8, and prostate volume of participants was 72.8 mL. This abstract focuses on the comparison of PAE versus TURP as the primary topic of interest. Prostatic arterial embolization versus transurethral resection of the prostate We included six RCTs and two NRSs with short-term (up to 12 months) follow-up, and two RCTs and one NRS with long-term follow-up (13 to 24 months).  Short-term follow-up: based on RCT evidence, there may be little to no difference in urologic symptom score improvement measured by the International Prostatic Symptom Score (IPSS) on a scale from 0 to 35, with higher scores indicating worse symptoms (mean difference [MD] 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.37 to 3.81; 6 RCTs, 360 participants; I² = 78%; low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in quality of life as measured by the IPSS-quality of life question on a scale from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating worse quality of life between PAE and TURP, respectively (MD 0.28, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.84; 5 RCTs, 300 participants; I² = 63%; low-certainty evidence). While we are very uncertain about the effects of PAE on major adverse events (risk ratio [RR] 0.75, 95% CI 0.19 to 2.97; 4 RCTs, 250 participants; I² = 24%; very low-certainty evidence), PAE likely increases retreatments (RR 3.20, 95% CI 1.41 to 7.27; 4 RCTs, 303 participants; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). PAE may make little to no difference in erectile function measured by the International Index of Erectile Function-5 on a scale from 1 to 25, with higher scores indicating better function (MD -0.50 points, 95% CI -5.88 to 4.88; 2 RCTs, 120 participants; I² = 68%; low-certainty evidence). Based on NRS evidence, PAE may reduce the occurrence of ejaculatory disorders (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.73; 1 NRS, 260 participants; low-certainty evidence). Long-term follow-up: based on RCT evidence, PAE may result in little to no difference in urologic symptom scores (MD 2.58 points, 95% CI -1.54 to 6.71; 2 RCTs, 176 participants; I² = 73%; low-certainty evidence) and quality of life (MD 0.50 points, 95% CI -0.03 to 1.04; 2 RCTs, 176 participants; I² = 29%; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about major adverse events (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.20 to 4.05; 2 RCTs, 206 participants; I² = 72%; very low-certainty evidence). PAE likely increases retreatments (RR 3.80, 95% CI 1.32 to 10.93; 1 RCT, 81 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). While PAE may result in little to no difference in erectile function (MD 3.09 points, 95% CI -0.76 to 6.94; 1 RCT, 81 participants; low-certainty evidence), PAE may reduce the occurrence of ejaculatory disorders (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.98; 1 RCT, 50 participants; low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Compared to TURP, PAE may provide similar improvement in urologic symptom scores and quality of life. While we are very uncertain about major adverse events, PAE likely increases retreatment rates. While erectile function may be similar, PAE may reduce ejaculatory disorders. Certainty of evidence for the outcomes of this review was low or very low except for retreatment (moderate-certainty evidence), signaling that our confidence in the reported effect size is limited or very limited, and that this topic should be better informed by future research.

A Randomized Trial Evaluating the Use of a Smart Water Bottle to Increase Fluid Intake in Stone Formers.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate if the use of a smart water bottle improves urine volume in stone forming patients. METHODS: Adults with nephrolithiasis and low urine volume (<1.5 L) documented on a 24-hour urinalysis (24 hr U) were randomized to receive either standard dietary recommendations to increase fluid intake (DR arm), or DR and a smart water bottle (HidrateSpark®; Hydrate Inc., Minneapolis, MN) that recorded fluid intake, synced to the user's smartphone, and provided reminders to drink (SB arm). Participants completed baseline surveys assessing barriers to hydration. They then repeated a 24 hr U and survey at 6 and 12 weeks, respectively. RESULTS: Eighty-five subjects (44 DR, 41 SB) were enrolled. The main baseline factor limiting fluid intake was not remembering to drink (60%). Follow-up 24 hr Us were available for 51 patients. The mean increase in volume was greater in the SB arm (1.37 L, 95% confidence interval -0.51 to 3.25) than the DR arm (0.79 L, 95% confidence interval -1.15 to 2.73) (P = .04). A smaller percentage of subjects in the SB arm reported not remembering to drink as the main factor limiting fluid intake in the follow-up questionnaire compared to baseline (45.4% vs. 68.4%, P < .05). This was not true for the DR arm (40.0% vs. 51.2%, P = .13). CONCLUSIONS: Difficulty remembering to drink is a barrier to achieving sufficient fluid intake in stone formers. The use of a smart bottle was associated with greater increases in 24 hr U volumes and less difficulty remembering to drink.

Association of stone surgery with patient-reported complications after spinal cord injury.

AIMS: To determine if a history of urinary stone surgery in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) is associated with an increased incidence of SCI-related complications and lower quality of life (QOL). METHODS: The Neurogenic Bladder Research Group (NBRG) registry is a multicenter, prospective, observational study which measures QOL after acquired SCI. Over 1.5 years, 1479 participants were enrolled and grouped according to history of stone surgery. We evaluated SCI-related complications, QOL, and associations between patient factors and prior stone surgery using multivariable regression. RESULTS: Participants were a median of 11 years post-SCI and 189 (12.8%) reported prior bladder or kidney stone surgery; 95.8% of these occurred after the SCI. Median time between SCI and first stone was 5.6 years (IQR: 1.8-12.8). Hospitalizations were higher for those with prior stone surgery, with common reasons including UTIs, blood clots, pressure ulcers, and pneumonia (p < 0.001). During the year of observation, the incidence of stone surgery was 17% in those with a prior history of stone surgery and 2% per year in those without prior stone surgery (p < 0.001). Controlling for covariates, bladder management strategy, age, BMI, and years since SCI were associated with history of stone surgery. CONCLUSIONS: People with SCI and a history of surgical stone disease are at high risk for episodes of recurrent stones and increased hospitalizations, particularly those with kidney stones and indwelling catheter use. Identification of high-risk patients may guide tailored surveillance for complications and stone prevention strategies.