A prospective study on single-port versus multiport patient-reported surgical outcomes.

Introduction: We sought to determine potential patient reported advantages of the da Vinci single-port (SP) robotic system for urological procedures compared with the previous model, the da Vinci multiport (MP) system. The SP model utilizes a single 30 to 40 mm incision rather than multiple 5 to 22 mm incisions. This project aims to prospectively investigate the impact of the novel SP system on patient reported cosmetic and psychometric surgical outcomes. Methods: We conducted a prospective study of patients who underwent uro-oncologic surgery by three urologists at the University of Illinois Chicago from April to November 2021. Study participants completed a Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire 20 and 90 days post-procedure. The Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire is a reliable measure of surgical scars that includes five subscales: Appearance, Symptoms, Consciousness, Satisfaction with Appearance, and Satisfaction with Symptoms. Higher scores represented worse reported outcomes. Results: On Postoperative Day 20, there were 77 responses (53 SP and 24 MP). Patients receiving SP procedures reported more favourable outcomes in terms of appearance, symptoms, consciousness, and pain medication. On Day 90, there were 37 responses (24 SP and 13 MP). Patients receiving SP procedures reported more favourable outcomes in terms of appearance. No significant differences were seen on Day 90 in terms of pain, medication, symptoms, consciousness, or satisfaction. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the superiority of the SP in patient reported cosmetic and pain outcomes on short- and long-term follow-up after uro-oncological surgical procedures. Symptomatic and cosmetic advantages are present at the 20 day follow-up, with better scar appearance being significant 90 days after surgery.

Gender-affirming vaginoplasty: Technical considerations in patients with genital skin deficiency.

INTRODUCTION: Gender dysphoria affects over 1 million American adults. Vaginoplasty is a critical step in gender affirmation, and many patients have insufficient genital skin for full-depth penile inversion vaginoplasty (PIV). We reviewed the literature for technical considerations addressing this and present our data supporting the use of peritoneal flaps (Davydov technique). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive review of modern literature was conducted. Second, we present a retrospective case review of our experience with PIV, including data from procedures utilizing peritoneal flaps. RESULTS: We identified 20 original articles, including retrospective and prospective case and cohort studies. Approaches included the application of local soft tissue grafts and flaps, peritoneal flaps, and intestinal segments. Between June 2018 and February 2021, 47 patients at our institution, underwent PIV for the treatment of gender dysphoria. Nineteen of those patients underwent robotic-assisted peritoneal flap procedure in addition to PIV. In this cohort, the mean follow-up was 200.6 ± 124.8 days. Mean neovaginal depth was 13.1 ± 3.0 cm intra-operatively and 11.0 cm at the last follow-up. Twenty-six percent of complications were Clavien Grade 1 or 2; others included wound dehiscence (30.4%), perianal and urethral fistula (13.0%), and neovaginal stenosis (8.7%). The majority of patients reported satisfactory results in terms of sexual function with intact tactile and erogenous sensation. Almost half were able to have penetrative vaginal intercourse at the last follow-up. We did not aim to perform statistical calculations to compare the outcomes of PIV with and without robotic-assisted peritoneal flap augmentation, as the groups were not constructed in that manner. However, it is evident that anatomical and functional results as well as the distribution of postoperative complications seem similar. CONCLUSION: Vaginoplasty is indicated in a growing population of patients with a wide range of medical histories and anatomic variations. Genitourinary reconstructive surgeons must have several methods to achieve full-depth vaginoplasty in cases of inadequate genital skin. Peritoneal flaps serve as a versatile, safe, and functionally advantageous solution.

Algorithms for Predicting the Probability of Azoospermia from Follicle Stimulating Hormone: Design and Multi-Institutional External Validation.

PURPOSE: To predict the probability of azoospermia without a semen analysis in men presenting with infertility by developing an azoospermia prediction model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two predictive algorithms were generated, one with follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) as the only input and another logistic regression (LR) model with additional clinical inputs of age, luteinizing hormone, total testosterone, and bilateral testis volume. Men presenting between 01/2016 and 03/2020 with semen analyses, testicular ochiodemetry, and serum gonadotropin measurements collected within 120 days were included. An azoospermia prediction model was developed with multi-institutional two-fold external validation from tertiary urologic infertility clinics in Chicago, Miami, and Milan. RESULTS: Total 3,497 participants were included (n=Miami 946, Milan 1,955, Chicago 596). Incidence of azoospermia in Miami, Milan, and Chicago was 13.8%, 23.8%, and 32.0%, respectively. Predictive algorithms were generated with Miami data. On Milan external validation, the LR and quadratic FSH models both demonstrated good discrimination with areas under the receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) of 0.79 and 0.78, respectively. Data from Chicago performed with AUCs of 0.71 for the FSH only model and 0.72 for LR. Correlation between the quadratic FSH model and LR model was 0.95 with Milan and 0.92 with Chicago data. CONCLUSIONS: We present and validate algorithms to predict the probability of azoospermia. The ability to predict the probability of azoospermia without a semen analysis is useful when there are logistical hurdles in obtaining a semen analysis or for reevaluation prior to surgical sperm extraction.

Single-port Versus Multi-port Robotic-assisted Procedures From the Patient's Perspective: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: The da Vinci SP® single-port system, differently from prior platforms, utilizes a single 2.5 cm incision to accommodate 1 flexible camera and 3 articulated robotic arms. Potential advantages include shorter hospitalization, improved cosmesis, and reduced postoperative pain. This project investigates the impact of the novel single-port system on cosmetic and psychometric patient assessment. METHODS: The Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire (a validated patient-reported outcomes measure for surgical scar) has been administered retrospectively to patients who underwent either an SP or Xi® urological procedure at a single center. Four domains were assessed: Appearance, Consciousness, Satisfaction With Appearance, and Satisfaction With Symptoms. Higher scores represent worse reported outcomes. RESULTS: Compared to 78 Xi procedure recipients (mean 15.28), 104 SP procedure recipients (mean 13.84) reported significantly better cosmetic scar appearance U(NSP=104, NMP=78) = 3,739 (P = .007) where U is the difference between the 2 rank totals, and NSP and NMP represent the number of single-port and multi-port procedure recipient respondents, respectively. Similarly, the SP cohort (mean 8.80) compared to the Xi group (mean 9.87) demonstrated significantly better consciousness of their surgical scar, U(NSP=104, NMP=78) = 3,329 (P = .045), and higher satisfaction with the cosmetic appearance of their surgical scar, U(NSP=103, NMP=78) = 3,232 (P = .022), with the SP group (mean 11.35) attaining better scores than the Xi group (mean 12.54). No significant difference was found for "Satisfaction With Symptoms," U(NSP=103, NMP=78) = 3,969 (P = .88), despite the SP group (mean 6.58) attaining lower scores than the Xi group (mean 6.74). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates patients' favorable perception of SP versus XI surgery in terms of aesthetic outcomes. An ongoing study is investigating the relationship between cosmetic satisfaction and length of stay, postoperative pain, and narcotic use.

Factors contributing to healthcare professional burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid turnaround global survey.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals (HCPs) on the front lines against COVID-19 may face increased workload and stress. Understanding HCPs' risk for burnout is critical to supporting HCPs and maintaining the quality of healthcare during the pandemic. METHODS: To assess exposure, perceptions, workload, and possible burnout of HCPs during the COVID-19 pandemic we conducted a cross-sectional survey. The main outcomes and measures were HCPs' self-assessment of burnout, indicated by a single item measure of emotional exhaustion, and other experiences and attitudes associated with working during the COVID-19 pandemic. FINDINGS: A total of 2,707 HCPs from 60 countries participated in this study. Fifty-one percent of HCPs reported burnout. Burnout was associated with work impacting household activities (RR = 1·57, 95% CI = 1·39-1·78, P<0·001), feeling pushed beyond training (RR = 1·32, 95% CI = 1·20-1·47, P<0·001), exposure to COVID-19 patients (RR = 1·18, 95% CI = 1·05-1·32, P = 0·005), and making life prioritizing decisions (RR = 1·16, 95% CI = 1·02-1·31, P = 0·03). Adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) was protective against burnout (RR = 0·88, 95% CI = 0·79-0·97, P = 0·01). Burnout was higher in high-income countries (HICs) compared to low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) (RR = 1·18; 95% CI = 1·02-1·36, P = 0·018). INTERPRETATION: Burnout is present at higher than previously reported rates among HCPs working during the COVID-19 pandemic and is related to high workload, job stress, and time pressure, and limited organizational support. Current and future burnout among HCPs could be mitigated by actions from healthcare institutions and other governmental and non-governmental stakeholders aimed at potentially modifiable factors, including providing additional training, organizational support, and support for family, PPE, and mental health resources.

Factors Contributing to Healthcare Professional Burnout During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Rapid Turnaround Global Survey.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals (HCPs) on the front lines against COVID-19 may face increased workload, and stress. Understanding HCPs risk for burnout is critical to supporting HCPs and maintaining the quality of healthcare during the pandemic. METHODS: To assess exposure, perceptions, workload, and possible burnout of HCPs during the COVID-19 pandemic we conducted a cross-sectional survey. The main outcomes and measures were HCPs self-assessment of burnout and other experiences and attitudes associated with working during the COVID-19 pandemic. FINDINGS: A total of 2,707 HCPs from 60 countries participated in this study. Fifty-one percent of HCPs reported burnout. Burnout was associated with work impacting household activities (RR=1.57, 95% CI=1.39-1.78, P<0.001), feeling pushed beyond training (RR=1.32, 95% CI=1.20-1.47, P<0.001), exposure to COVID-19 patients (RR=1.18, 95% CI=1.05-1.32, P=0.005), making life prioritizing decisions (RR=1.16, 95% CI=1.02-1.31, P=0.03). Adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) was protective against burnout (RR=0.88, 95% CI=0.79-0.97, P=0.01). Burnout was higher in high-income countries (HICs) compared to low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) (RR=1.18; 95% CI=1.02-1.36, P=0.018). INTERPRETATION: Burnout is prevalent at higher than previously reported rates among HCPs working during the COVID-19 pandemic and is related to high workload, job stress, and time pressure, and limited organizational support. Current and future burnout among HCPs could be mitigated by actions from healthcare institutions and other governmental and non-governmental stakeholders aimed at potentially modifiable factors, including providing additional training, organizational support, support for family, PPE, and mental health resources. FUNDING: N/A.