Quality of life of patients treated for kidney stones 10-20mm in diameter in terms of the type of operation performed: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Urolithiasis is a common chronic disease whose effect on patients' quality of life (QOL) is considerable but depends on the treatment received, differing between types of surgery. Intrarenal stones can be treated with different techniques: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), flexible ureteroscopy (fURS), and mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL), with proportional success and complication rates. The aim of this study was to qualitatively explore the impact of the different techniques on patients' QOL and understand their experiences of treatment choices. METHODS: Patients treated for medium-sized kidney stones (10-20mm in diameter) were interviewed in a semi-structured manner. The interview data were transcribed and analyzed by theme according to consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) guidelines. RESULTS: Data saturation was achieved after interviewing 15 patients. The mean interview time was 34min (standard deviation (SD), 6.8min). The mean patient age was 54 years (SD, 9.5 years). Eight patients underwent ESWL, 10 were treated with fURS, and 8 underwent mini-PCNL. Twenty-seven subthemes were coded and regrouped into eight major themes, namely: no sense of choice in the decision-making process for eleven patients; extremely negative experiences of double-J stents for fourteen patients; concern about the risk of recurrence or treatment failure for thirteen patients; complicated hygiene and dietary recommendations for nine patients; technique-dependent postoperative outcomes; relatively well-tolerated operations for thirteen patients; a poor experience of sick leave, often because of a double-J stent; different views regarding future operations. In fact, a third of patients would choose the most effective treatment, a third would choose the simplest procedure and the last third would trust their urologist. Patients' experiences of these operations are variable. CONCLUSION: Urologists must support their patients by presenting the different treatment options with clear, appropriate, and unbiased information. This should ensure patients take part in treatment decisions as part of a personalized treatment plan.

Comparison of open and robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy approaches using multicentric data (UroCCR-47 study).

We compared the outcomes of robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) and open partial nephrectomy (OPN) using contemporary data to respond to unmet clinical needs. Data from patients included in the registry who underwent partial nephrectomy between January 01, 2014 and June 30, 2017 within 20 centres of the French Network for Research on Kidney Cancer UroCCR were collected (NCT03293563). Statistical methods included adjusted multivariable analyses. Rates of peri- and post-operative transfusion, and of surgical revision, were lower in the RPN (n = 1434) than the OPN (n = 571) group (2.9% vs. 6.0%, p = 0.0012; 3.8% vs. 11.5%, p < 0.0001; 2.4% vs. 6.7%, p < 0.0001, respectively). In multivariable analyses, RPN was independently associated with fewer early post-operative complications than OPN (overall: odds-ratio [95% confidence interval, CI] = 0.48 [0.35-0.66]; severe: 0.29 [0.16-0.54], p < 0.0001 for both) and shorter hospital stays (34% [30%; 37%], p < 0.0001). RPN was also a significantly associated with a decresedrisk of post-operative acute renal failure, and new-onset chronic kidney disease at 3 and 12 months post-surgery. There were no between-group differences in oncological outcomes. In comparison with OPN, RPN was associated with improved peri- and post-operative morbidity, better functional outcomes, and shorter hospital stays. Our results support the use of RPN, even for large and complex tumours.

Feasibility of EXIME® temporary prosthesis placement and removal in men with acute or chronic urinary retention after failure or inability to selfcatheterize.

INTRODUCTION: Urological emergencies represent 7% of admissions, 29% of which are acute urine retention. We report the first results of a protocol evaluating a new device in case of failure of self-catheterization, replacing a permanent catheter: the urethral device EXIME®. METHOD: Intention-to-treat study on the feasibility of inserting the EXIME® prosthesis in a day hospital after simple urethral gel instillation in men with urine retention. EXIME® was proposed to all patients after failure of Foley catheter removal and refusal or inability to learn self-catheterization. The protocol was referenced (NCT04218942) after obtaining the agreement of the committee for the protection of individuals. RESULTS: Among 278 patients admitted for a trial of Foley catheter removal, 15 patients with failed voiding resumption and refusal or failure of self-catheterization were offered the prosthesis. The median age was 73 years with a median retention volume of 700mL. The median prostatic volume was 60g. Fourteen patients had their prosthesis inserted in good conditions of comfort for the practitioner and the patient. One failed placement was noted. The difficulty of insertion was estimated by the practitioner at 0 on median (VAS from 0 to 10), and for its removal at 0. The pain during the insertion of the device was evaluated by the patients at 2.00 and for the removal at 0 (VAS from 0 to 10). 6 patients had satisfactory voiding recovery at D0. DISCUSSION: We proposed the placement of EXIME to patients who had failed the trial of Foley removal and were unable and/or unwilling to self-catheterize. These were patients with poor bladder contractility and a high risk of retention recurrence. Despite this mixed result, the simplicity of the device and the comfortable expectation of an endoscopic procedure seem promising. CONCLUSION: Insertion and retrieval of EXIME®prostatic prosthesis were easy and well tolerated in our population. Insertion failed in one patient. A comparative prospective study with self catheterization is necessary to determine its effectiveness.

[Benign prostatic hyperplasia surgery and patient's information: What do patients understand and remember?] / Chirurgie de l'hypertrophie bénigne de prostate et information des patients : qu'est ce que les patients comprennent et retiennent ?

INTRODUCTION: Preoperative information is a key to adherence to treatment for the patients, but may be misunderstood because of its density and complexity. The aim of this study was to assess comprehension and satisfaction of patients about preoperative information of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) surgery. Factors influencing patient understanding were also studied. PATIENTS AND METHODS: It was a monocentric study on questionnaires including every patients planned for BPH surgery, whatever the surgical technique. A survey was sent at patient's home after the preoperative consultation. RESULTS: One hundred and six of 210 patients (50,5 %) returned the questionnaire. 38,68 % (n=41) found the quality of information excellent (9 or 10 out of 10), and 45,28 % (n=48) found the quality of information good (7 or 8 out of 10). The main recalled complications were retrograde ejaculation (39.6 %, n=42/106), and bleeding (29,2 %, n=31/106). 57.6 % of patients (n=61) remembered receiving the written information sheet of the French Association of Urology. 5.7 % (n=6) hesitated having the procedure. Only patient's age was significantly associated with difference of comprehension (p<0.005). CONCLUSION: Information given before a BPH surgery seems satisfactory although it was poorly understood, notably about complications. Providing complete oral information, insisting on complications, and giving the written information sheet are essential for a good doctor-patient relationship and a forensic serenity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Efficacy and security of continent catheterizable channels at short and middle term for adult neurogenic bladder dysfunction.

AIMS: The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness and the complications rate following continent cutaneous channels (CCC) procedures, at short and medium term follow-up (FU). MATERIALS & METHODS: A continuous retrospective case series (2008-2018): all patients who have undergone a CCC for neurogenic bladder were included in our department. The primary outcome was the effectiveness of CCC defined by the status of catheterizability (by the patient or a care-giver), continence of the tube, and absence of reintervention at 3 and 12 months FU. The secondary outcome was the prevalence of postoperative complications at 3 and 12 months FU. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were included during the study period in our department. Median follow up was 3,3 years (1.5-6.1). The overall effectiveness of CCC was 67.9% (n=36/53) at 3 months FU and 45,3% (n=24) at 12 months FU. The global rate of complications was 60.4% (n=32/53) at 3 months, and 73.6% (n=39/73) at 12 months FU. The statistical analysis showed no statistical differences on efficacy and complications in the different subgroups of CCC. CONCLUSIONS: In the current series, the effectiveness and the complications rates following CCC were comparable across the procedure types. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

[Enhanced recovery after robotic partial nephrectomy: Evaluation of patient's satisfaction]. / Réhabilitation précoce après tumorectomie rénale robot-assistée : quelle satisfaction des patients ?

INTRODUCTION: Several enhanced recovery protocols after surgery showed a benefit for postoperative recovery and reduction of hospital lengths of stay. Very few studies evaluated patient's satisfaction about these enhanced recovery protocols. The aim of this study was to evaluate patient's satisfaction about our enhanced recovery protocol for robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN). METHODS: A validated survey EORTC In PATSAT32 with a specific questionnaire about protocol was sent to the first patients included in the enhanced recovery protocol for RAPN. The survey was sent after the postoperative consultation at postoperative day 30. Responses were anonymous. Satisfaction's scores for EORTC questionnaire were calculated for each dimension with Likert's method. Scores were transformed linearly into a scale ranging from 0 to 100, where 100 represent the highest level of care satisfaction (EORTC method). RESULTS: A total of 21 patients (50%) returned the completed questionnaire. The overall satisfaction score was 75.1% (37.3; 100) in the EORTC survey. In total, 71.4% of patients (n=15) were satisfied with the discharge at postoperative day 2 (POD2) and 5 patients (23.8%) found this premature. None of the patients had a negative impression on the clinical pathway. The average overall evaluation on the protocol by patients, on a satisfaction scale of 1 to 10 was 8.9/10. CONCLUSION: In this study, patients included in the enhanced recovery protocol after RAPN were very satisfied with their pre-, per- and postoperative care. Given patients satisfaction, reduction of LOS, patient's safety and the medicoeconomic advantage, these enhanced recovery protocol have become a priority to develop and evaluate. More large studies are needed to assess the patient's experience with these clinical pathways. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

[Contribution of meb to endometriosis patients' diagnosis and treatment]. / Apport de la réunion de concertation pluridisciplinaire à la pertinence du diagnostic et du traitement de l'endométriose.

OBJECTIVES: Diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis may be complex and therefore justify the discussion of therapeutic decisions in a multidisciplinary endometriosis board (MEB). The development of endometriosis regional expert centers requires an assessment of the quality and relevance of MEB. METHODS: Qualitiative retrospective study on patients whose management was discussed in Centre Hospitalier Lyon-Sud between June 2013 and December 2017. RESULTS: Among 376 patients presented in MEB, 309 (80.2%) were painful and 184 (59.5%) had complex endometriosis. A complete clinical evaluation was performed in 120 (38.8%) patients. MRI was performed for 370 (98.4%) patients including 303 (81.9%) with a second reading by an expert radiologist. These second readings allowed a diagnosis correction in 88 (60.7 %) patients with complex endometriosis. MR enterography (27.8 %) and rectal endoscopic sonography (14.4%) were the most frequently used third-line exams to complete the initial imaging of digestive lesion in patients with rectal endometriosis. Surgery was proposed for 199 (52,9%) patients including 108 (58,7%) with complex endometriosis. CONCLUSION: One of the major interests of MEB in endometriosis is the second reading of MRI, which, by identifying complex endometriosis initially undiagnosed or underestimated, enabled to better discuss the benefits/risks of therapeutic choices, and to organize complex surgeries when those were retained. The development of MEB in regional expert centers will contribute to optimizing the relevance of care for patients with endometriosis.

Management of endometriosis: CNGOF/HAS clinical practice guidelines - Short version.

First-line diagnostic investigations for endometriosis are physical examination and pelvic ultrasound. The second-line investigations are: targeted pelvic examination performed by an expert clinician, transvaginal ultrasound performed by an expert physician sonographer (radiologist or gynaecologist), and pelvic MRI. Management of endometriosis is recommended when the disease has a functional impact. Recommended first-line hormonal therapies for the management of endometriosis-related pain are combined hormonal contraceptives (CHCs) or the 52mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (IUS). There is no evidence base on which to recommend systematic preoperative hormonal therapy solely to prevent surgical complications or facilitate surgery. After surgery for endometriosis, a CHC or 52mg levonorgestrel-releasing IUS is recommended as first-line treatment when pregnancy is not desired. In the event of failure of the initial treatment, recurrence, or multiorgan involvement, a multidisciplinary team meeting is recommended, involving physicians, surgeons and other professionals. A laparoscopic approach is recommended for surgical treatment of endometriosis. HRT can be offered to postmenopausal women who have undergone surgical treatment for endometriosis. Antigonadotrophic hormonal therapy is not recommended for patients with endometriosis and infertility to increase the chances of spontaneous pregnancy, including postoperatively. Fertility preservation options must be discussed with patients undergoing surgery for ovarian endometriomas.

[Management of endometriosis: CNGOF-HAS practice guidelines (short version)]. / Prise en charge de l'endométriose : recommandations pour la pratique clinique CNGOF-HAS (texte court).

First-line investigations to diagnose endometriosis are clinical examination and pelvic ultrasound. Second-line investigations include pelvic examination performed by a referent clinician, transvaginal ultrasound performed by a referent echographist, and pelvic MRI. It is recommended to treat endometriosis when it is symptomatic. First-line hormonal treatments recommended for the management of painful endometriosis are combined with hormonal contraceptives or levonorgestrel 52mg IUD. There is no evidence to recommend systematic preoperative hormonal therapy for the unique purpose of preventing the risk of surgical complications or facilitating surgery. After endometriosis surgery, combined hormonal contraceptives or levonorgestrel SIU 52mg are recommended as first-line therapy in the absence of desire of pregnancy. In case of initial treatment failure, recurrence, or multiple organ involvement by endometriosis, medico-surgical and multidisciplinary discussion is recommended. The laparoscopic approach is recommended for the surgical treatment of endometriosis. HRT may be offered in postmenopausal women operated for endometriosis. In case of infertility related to endometriosis, it is not recommended to prescribe anti-gonadotropic hormone therapy to increase the rate of spontaneous pregnancy, including postoperatively. The possibilities of fertility preservation should be discussed with the patient in case of surgery for ovarian endometrioma.

[Urinary tract involvement by endometriosis. Techniques and outcomes of surgical management: CNGOF-HAS Endometriosis Guidelines]. / Localisations urinaires de l'endométriose. Résultats et modalités techniques de la prise en charge chirurgicale. RPC Endométriose CNGOF-HAS.

Urinary tract involvement by endometriosis is reported in 1% of endometriosis patients (NP3). Consequences range from pelvic pain for bladder localizations to silent kidney loss in case of chronic ureteral obstruction (NP3). The feasibility of laparoscopic management was widely proven (NP3) and may reduce hospital stay length (NP4). Radical surgery with partial cystectomy for bladder localizations was shown to significantly and durably reduce pain symptoms with low risk of a severe postoperative complications (NP3). Medical hormonal treatment also shows short-term reduction of pain symptoms (NP4). Transureteral resection of bladder endometriosis nodule is not recommended (grade C) because of a high postoperative recurrence rate (NP4). Given a high risk of silent kidney loss, it is recommended that patients with ureteral involvement by endometriosis are managed by a multidisciplinary team considering urinary and potential extra-urinary localizations of endometriosis (grade C). No recommendation can be made on which technique to prefer between conservative (ureterolysis) or radical surgical techniques or on benefit and length of ureteral stents in case of ureteral involvement. Surgical management of bladder and ureteral localizations of endometriosis do not seem to be associated with altered or improved postoperative fertility (NP4). Since late postoperative ureteral anastomosis stenosis were reported with silent kidney loss, repeated postoperative imaging monitoring is justified (expert opinion).