A Novel Low-Cost Uroflowmetry for Patient Telemonitoring.

Uroflowmetry (UF) is a crucial guideline-recommended tool for men with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). Moreover, UF is a helpful decision-making tool for the management of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). In the last few years, telemedicine and telehealth have increased exponentially as cost-effective treatment options for both patients and physicians. Telemedicine and telehealth have been well positioned during the COVID-19 pandemic to prevent healthcare system overload and to ensure adequate management of patients through screening, diagnosis, and follow-up at home. In the present manuscript, the main characteristics and performance of a novel and low-cost device for home-based UF have been analyzed. The simple weight-transducer method has been applied to perform UF. An inexpensive load cell connected to a 24 bit analogic digital converter (ADC) sends data to a cloud server via SIM card or home Wi-Fi. Data are processed and shown in graphics with both volume and flow rate as a function of time, allowing for measurement of average flow rate, maximum flow rate, voided volume, and voiding time. A numerical algorithm allows for filtering of the dynamic effect due to the urine gravity acceleration and for removing the funnel to simplify the home measurement procedure. Through an online platform, the physician can see and compare each UF data. The device's reliability has been validated in a first laboratory setting and showed excellent performance. This approach based on domiciliary tests and an online platform can revolutionize the urologic clinic landscape by offering a constant patient cost-effective follow-up, eliminating the time wasted waiting in the office setting.

The Role of Testosterone in the Elderly: What Do We Know?

Testosterone is the most important hormone in male health. Aging is characterized by testosterone deficiency due to decreasing testosterone levels associated with low testicular production, genetic factors, adiposity, and illness. Low testosterone levels in men are associated with sexual dysfunction (low sexual desire, erectile dysfunction), reduced skeletal muscle mass and strength, decreased bone mineral density, increased cardiovascular risk and alterations of the glycometabolic profile. Testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) shows several therapeutic effects while maintaining a good safety profile in hypogonadal men. TRT restores normal levels of serum testosterone in men, increasing libido and energy level and producing beneficial effects on bone density, strength and muscle as well as yielding cardioprotective effects. Nevertheless, TRT could be contraindicated in men with untreated prostate cancer, although poor findings are reported in the literature. In addition, different potential side effects, such as polycythemia, cardiac events and obstructive sleep apnea, should be monitored. The aim of our review is to provide an updated background regarding the pros and cons of TRT, evaluating its role and its clinical applicability in different domains.

Minimally invasive simple prostatectomy: Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopy. A comparative study.

PURPOSE: Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) is a novel surgical procedure for the management of obstructive symptoms caused by enlarged prostate glands. Before the introduction of minimally invasive techniques, the standard approach was the open simple prostatectomy (OSP). The aim of our study was to compare intraoperative and perioperative outcomes of robotic (RASP) and laparoscopic (LSP) simple prostatectomy. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from patients who underwent minimally invasive simple prostatectomy at the Urological Department of Portogruaro Hospital, Portogruaro, and at the Urological Department of "San Bassiano" Hospital, in Bassano del Grappa, from March 2015 to December 2020. Data collected from medical records included age, body mass index, prostate volume, operative time, preoperative International Prostatic Symptoms Score (IPSS), postoperative IPSS, time with drainage, blood transfusion, intraoperative complications, perioperative complications and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Robotic-assisted (n = 25) and laparoscopic simple prostatectomy (n = 25) were performed with a transvesical approach. No significant differences were observed regarding baseline characteristics, body mass index, prostate volume and IPSS. Operative time was lower in the laparoscopic group (122 min vs 139 min) (p = 0.024), while hospital stay was lower in the robotic group (4 days vs 6 days) (p = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy is a safe technique with results comparable to laparoscopic simple prostatectomy, encompassing the advantage of a shorter hospitalization. Considering the costs and the limited availability of robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy, laparoscopic simple prostatectomy is a valid and safe alternative for experienced surgeons.