Impact of Case Volume on Shock Wave Lithotripsy Outcomes: Data from the National Shock Wave Lithotripsy Database of New Zealand.

Purpose: To assess the impact of individual operator case volume on shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) treatment outcomes in more than 9000 stone cases over a 20-year period in New Zealand. Materials and Methods: Stone cases treated with SWL on the Mobile Medical Technology (MMT) vehicle between June 19, 1995, and December 1, 2014, were identified. Data collection was undertaken prospectively for patient, stone, and treatment characteristics, and retrospectively for treatment outcomes. Multivariate analysis using binary logistic regression was undertaken to assess whether radiographer stone case volume (stones/year) was an independent predictor of SWL success (stone free or clinically insignificant residual fragments ≤4 mm at follow-up). Results: Sixteen radiographers delivered treatment to the included cohort (9039 stone cases), with a median case volume (stones/year) of 73 (range: 37-197) and median total of 425 stones treated (range: 71-1721). The two radiographers with highest case volumes achieved the highest success rates. Radiographer case volume (stones/year) was independently associated with SWL success (odds ratio [OR]: 1.004, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.003-1.005, p < 0.0001) and reduced need for post-SWL hospital admission (OR: 0.997, 95% CI: 0.994-1.000, p = 0.028), but there was no associated decrease in post-SWL urosepsis (OR: 0.999, 95% CI: 0.974-1.025, p = 0.941), perinephric hematoma (OR: 1.003, 95% CI: 0.985-1.020, p = 0.778), or need for auxiliary procedures (OR: 1.000, 95% CI: 0.998-1.002, p = 0.871). Conclusions: SWL success rates can be improved by increasing the frequency of cases performed by individual operators. In this multicenter cohort of more than 9000 stone cases treated over a 20-year period, the best outcomes were seen for those radiographers performing >150 cases per year.

A case of large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the bladder with prolonged spontaneous remission.

Large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) of the urinary bladder are rare. We present a case of a 72-year-old man who presented with back pain and acute renal failure. Ultrasound showed a soft tissue mass in the base of the bladder causing bilateral ureteric obstruction. Subsequent biopsy of this mass demonstrated neuroendocrine carcinoma. He was commenced on neoadjuvant chemotherapy (carboplatin/etoposide) and proceeded to a radical cysto-prostatectomy. Histology revealed a LCNEC involving the bladder, T4a with invasion through to adipose tissue and posteriorly at perivesical resection margins. In addition, there was a Gleason score 9 prostatic adenocarcinoma, distinct from the neuroendocrine carcinoma. Following surgery, the patient developed gross local-regional recurrence and refused further systemic therapy. However, 1 year following referral to palliative care, a further CT-PET showed complete spontaneous remission of his disease. There are only few case reports of LCNEC of the urinary bladder therefore the pathogenesis and treatment protocol are still unclear. This case report highlights the unpredictable nature of this disease.

Routine Antibiotic Prophylaxis Is Not Required for Patients Undergoing Shockwave Lithotripsy: Outcomes from a National Shockwave Lithotripsy Database in New Zealand.

PURPOSE: To assess the effectiveness of routine prophylactic antibiotics in the prevention of urinary tract infection (UTI) after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) and identify predictors of UTI development in a multicenter series of over 10,000 stone cases treated in New Zealand over a 20-year period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients treated with SWL on the Mobile Medical Technology vehicle between June 19, 1995 and December 1, 2014 were identified. Data collection was undertaken prospectively for patient, stone and treatment characteristics, and, retrospectively, for treatment outcomes. The primary outcome was clinical UTI, defined as development of UTI symptoms requiring antibiotic therapy. Secondary outcomes included urinary sepsis, need for hospital admission due to infectious complications, and length of hospital stay. Multivariate analysis was undertaken to identify factors independently associated with the development of post-SWL UTI. RESULTS: Antibiotic prophylaxis was used in 62.1% (n = 6710) of cases. On comparing patients who received prophylactic antibiotics to those in whom antibiotics were withheld, no significant differences were observed in terms of post-SWL UTI (1.1% vs 1.3%, p = 0.335) or urinary sepsis (0.04% vs 0.15%, p = 0.075). The use of prophylactic antibiotics was not independently associated with post-SWL UTI (OR: 1.269, 95% CI: 0.886-1.818, p = 0.194). Female gender, larger stone size, and higher number of delivered shocks were predictive of UTI development, but antibiotic prophylaxis did not appear to offer any benefit in this subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Routine antibiotic prophylaxis was not associated with a reduction in clinical UTI after SWL in this cohort of over 10,000 stone cases in New Zealand.

Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL): outcomes from a national SWL database in New Zealand.

OBJECTIVES: To present the national outcomes for New Zealand of over 9000 stone cases treated with SWL at 21 centres over a 20 year period. SUBJECTS/PATIENTS AND METHODS: Stone cases treated with SWL on board the Mobile Medical Technology (MMT) vehicle between 19 June 1995 and 1 December 2014 were identified, and data collection undertaken prospectively for patient, stone and treatment characteristics, and retrospectively for treatment outcomes. The primary outcome was treatment success, defined as complete stone clearance or clinically insignificant residual fragments (CIRFs) of ≤4 mm. Secondary outcomes were stone free rate, complications and auxiliary procedures, and all statistical analyses were descriptive. RESULTS: 9538 stone cases (7769 patients) were included. The overall, cumulative success rate was 58.7%; this included 45.1% that were stone free and 13.5% in which there were CIRFs ≤4 mm. Success rates varied widely by stone size and location. Overall rates of urinary tract infection, perinephric haematoma, hospital admission and ureteral stent placement were 1.1%, 0.2%, 6.8% and 4.1%, respectively. Variations in SWL protocols across centres limits the overall reliability of our findings. CONCLUSION: SWL remains a low morbidity management option requiring careful patient selection. This study provides valuable data for patient counseling and the formation of evidence based guidelines in SWL. The MMT SWL service has demonstrated that is it possible to deliver a high volume specialist stone service without requiring patients to travel further for treatment.