Outpatient laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: Feasibility and patient satisfaction.

OBJECTIVE: Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy is the standard surgery to correct apical pelvic organ prolapse. It is currently mainly practiced in the context of a conventional hospitalization, but more and more practitioners are developing it as an outpatient procedure. The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of outpatient laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy and patient satisfaction. METHODS: This was a retrospective study comparing outpatients with inpatients who had undergone laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. The main outcome was the rate of unscheduled visits and the number of early readmissions (i.e., <1 month). Secondary outcomes were complication rates and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were included with 42 women in each group. The rate of unscheduled consultations was 16.7 % (n = 7/42) in the outpatient group and 21 % (n = 9/42) in the inpatient group. 2.4 % (n = 1/42) of outpatients and 4.8 % (n = 2/42) of inpatients were re-hospitalized within a month after surgery. The complication rate was not significantly different between the groups. In the outpatient group, 88.2 % of patients were satisfied compared with 97.5 % in the inpatient group (p = 0.17) CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy can be considered a safe and satisfactory option.

Prospective evaluation of ambulatory laser vaporization of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) is an alternative to transurethral resection of the prostate in the surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Our objective was to prospectively evaluate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of ambulatory photoselective vaporization of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively collected data of all consecutive patients who underwent ambulatory PVP with the Greenlight(®) laser 180-W XPS at two centers between May 2012 and June 2013. Patients' characteristics, perioperative data, postoperative outcomes, complications, and patient's satisfaction were evaluated. Successful ambulatory care procedure was defined as the ability to leave the hospital in the evening of the operation. RESULTS: The ambulatory procedure was intended in 134 patients. Mean age was 67 years. Mean prostate volume was 54 ml, and Median American Society Anesthesiologists (ASA) score was 2. Ambulatory procedure was successful in 121 patients (90%). At 3 months, International Prostate Symptom Score (7.3 ± 4.9), maximal urinary flow rate (20.8 ± 7.6 ml/s), postvoid residual urine (19.2 ± 71 ml), and quality of life (1.6 ± 1.4) were significantly improved (P < 0.001). Fourteen patients (10.5%) had complications that were all minor (Clavien ≤ 2). Two patients had to be readmitted to the hospital. The majority of patients (89%) were satisfied with ambulatory care. Failure to complete ambulatory procedure was mostly related to logistical problem (70% of the cases). CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory PVP is feasible with functional results and complications comparable to that of traditional hospitalization. Ambulatory care yields high patient's satisfaction.

National prospective study on the use of local haemostatic agents during partial nephrectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the use of local haemostatic agents (HAs) in a prospective multicentre large series of partial nephrectomies (PNs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective National Observational Registry on the Practices of Haemostasis in Partial Nephrectomy (NEPHRON): the study was conducted in 54 French urological centres from 1 June to 31 December 2010. In all, 570 consecutive patients undergoing a PN were enrolled in this study in a prospective manner. The data was collected prospectively via an electronic case-report form: five different sheets were included for preoperative, perioperative, postoperative and follow-up data respectively. Information related to haemostasis was analysed. RESULTS: The median patient age was 60 years and the mean (range) tumour size was 3.68 (0.19-15) cm. An HA was primarily used in 71.4% of patients, with a statistically significant difference among surgical approaches (P = 0.024). In 91.8% of cases, a single use of a HA was sufficient for achieving haemostasis. The HA was used either alone (13.9%) or in association with sutures (80.3%). One or more additional haemostatic action(s) was needed in 12.3% of the cases. When comparing patients who received a HA with those who did not receive a HA, there was no statistical difference between the groups for tumour size (P = 0.542), collecting system drainage (P = 0.538), hospital stay (P = 0.508), operation time (P = 0.169), blood loss (P = 0.387) or transfusion rate (P = 0.713). CONCLUSION: HAs are widely used by urologists during PN. Progress is needed for standardising HA application, especially for the timing of application. For the time being, the role of the HA in nephron-sparing surgery is still to be evaluated.