To improve endoscopic recognition of the most frequently encountered urinary stone morphologies for a better aetiological approach in lithiasis by urologists.
Materials and MethodsAn expert urologist intraoperatively and prospectively (between June 2015 and June 2018) examined the surface, the section, and the nucleus of all encountered kidney stones. Fragmented stones were subsequently analysed by a biologist based on both microscopic morphological (i.e. binocular magnifying glass) and infrared (i.e. Fourier transform-infrared spectroscopy) examinations (microscopists were blinded to the endoscopic data). Morphological criteria were collected and classified for the endoscopic and microscopic studies. The Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test was used to detect differences between the endoscopic and microscopic diagnoses. A diagnosis for a given urinary stone was considered 'confirmed' for a non-statistically significant difference.
ResultsA total of 399 urinary stones were included in this study: 51.4% of the stones had only one morphological type, while 48.6% were mixed stones (41% had at least two morphologies and 7.6% had three morphologies). The overall matching rate was 81.6%. Diagnostics were confirmed for the following morphologies: whewellite (Ia or Ib), weddellite (IIa or IIb), uric acid (IIIa or IIIb), carbapatite-struvite association (IVb), and brushite (IVd).
ConclusionsOur preliminary study demonstrates the feasibility of using endoscopic morphology for the most frequently encountered urinary stones and didactic boards of confirmed endoscopic images are provided. The present study constitutes the first step toward endoscopic stone recognition, which is essential in lithiasis. We provide didactic boards of confirmed endoscopic images that pave the way for automatic computer-aided in situ recognition.
Although a high level of evidence is currently missing to draw any strong conclusion, published clinical series show that in select patients salvage treatment directed to nodal recurrence could lead to good oncologic outcomes. Although the optimal timing of androgen deprivation therapy in this setting is still unknown, such an approach could delay time to systemic treatment with an acceptable safety profile. Future prospective trials are awaited to better clarify this potential impact on well-defined endpoints.
Background
An enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway has shown benefit in oncologic surgery. However, literature is scarce regarding the impact of this pathway, alone or combined with prehabilitation (PreHab) programs, on outcomes after robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).
Methods
Included in this study were 507 consecutive patients undergoing RARP from 2014 to 2019. The primary endpoint was duration of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative blood loss, operative duration, readmission rate, and overall costs. Univariate and multivariate comparisons were performed according to the ERAS and PreHab program status.
Results
ERAS patients had shorter hospital stays (P < .001), reduced operative times (P < .001), and decreased blood loss (P < .001) in comparison with non‐ERAS patients. Shorter hospital stays were not associated with an increased readmission rate (7.9% [stable over time]; P = .757). Patients from an ERAS−/PreHab− group had a longer hospital stay (4.7 days) than those from an ERAS+/PreHab− group (3.5 days) and those from an ERAS+/PreHab+ group (1.6 days; P < .001). In a multivariate analysis, operative time and perioperative pathway (odds ratio for ERAS, 0.144; P < .001; odds ratio for ERAS and PreHab, 0.025; P < .001) were independently predictive for a prolonged length of stay (P < .001). Costs significantly decreased when ERAS and PreHab pathways were combined.
Conclusions
The implementation of ERAS and PreHab programs significantly changes the postoperative course of patients and may synergistically optimize RARP outcomes. The combination of these pathways improves patient recovery and is associated with reduced lengths of stay, blood loss, operative times, and costs without an increase in the postdischarge readmission rate.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.