No abstract

No abstract

Background: The limitations of the assessment of tumor aggressiveness by Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) and biopsies suggest that the diagnostic algorithm could be improved by quantitative measurements in some chosen indications. We assessed the tumor high-risk predictive performance of 3.0 Tesla (3.0T) multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) combined with nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopic sequences (NMR-S) in order to show that the metabolic analysis could bring out an evocative result for the aggressive form of prostate cancer. Methods:We conducted a retrospective study of 26 patients (mean age, 62.4 years) who had surgery for prostate cancer between 2009 and 2016 after pre-therapeutic assessment with 3.0T mp-MRI and NMR-S.Groups within the intermediate range of the D'Amico risk classification were divided into two categories, low risk (n=20) and high risk (n=6), according to the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) 2-3 limit. Histoprognostic discordances within various risk groups were compared with the corresponding predictive MRI values. The performance of predictive models was assessed based on sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.Results: After prostatectomy, histological analysis reclassified 18 patients as high-risk, including 16 who were T3 MRI grade, of whom 13 (81.3%) were found to be pT3. Among the patients who had cT1 or cT2 digital rectal examinations, the T3 MRI factor multiplied by 8.7 [odds ratio (OR), 8.7; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.3-56.2; P=0.024] the relative risk of being pT3 and by 5.8 (OR, 5.8; 95% CI, 0.95-35.7; P=0.05) the relative risk of being pGleason (pGS) > GS-prostate biopsy. Spectroscopic data showed that the choline concentration was significantly higher (P=0.001) in aggressive disease. Conclusions:The predictive model of tumor aggressiveness combining mp-MRI plus NMR-S was better than the mp-MRI model alone (AUC, 0.95 vs. 0.86). Information obtained by mp-MRI coupled with spectroscopy may improve the detection of occult aggressive disease, helping in the discrimination of intermediate risks.

No abstract

No abstract

Introduction: Various surgical centers tend to postpone a kidney transplantation (KT) to the following morning than to operate at night-time. The objective of our study was to assess whether there was any difference between daytime and night-time renal transplantation in our institution. Method: This study is a retrospective monocentric study including all the KTs that were performed between 2012 and 2013 by transplant expert surgeons in our institution. Clavien-Dindo (CD) complications were classified according to 7 variables going from 1 to 5. Time before postgraft diuresis and delayed graft function (DGF) were also analyzed. Two groups of patients were formed according to threshold value of incision time (6.30 p.m.). Data comparison were performed using the Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test. Results: A total of 179 patients were included. Median follow-up was 24 months. Cold ischemia time was longer in the night-time transplantation (1082 vs. 807 min, p < .001), but rewarming time was shorter (47.24 vs. 52.15 min, p = .628). No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups using the Kruskal-Wallis method for CD complications (Qobs: 0.076; p = .735). CD complications proportion was similar, with a majority of grade II complications (72.7% daytime group vs. 75.4% night-time group (p = .735). DGF (19 patients for daytime group vs. 13 patients for night-time group, p = .359) and time before postgraft diuresis (4.65 days daytime group vs. 5.27 days night-time group, p = .422) were similar between both groups. Multivariate analysis did not show significant predictors of CD complications Grade 3 and more.

To evaluate the impact of an history of radiation therapy on the outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation in male patients. Methods:The charts of all patients who underwent AUS implantation for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) after prostate surgery in thirteen centers between 2004 and 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. We excluded patients with neurogenic SUI. Continence rates and incidence of complications,

Introduction: Lors de la première vague épidémique Covid-19, des mesures de triage, sans PCR systématique, étaient mises en place pour sélectionner les patients à opérer. Notre étude a comparé leurs résultats chirurgicaux après triage à ceux d’un groupe contrôle. Matériel: L’analyse portait sur l’ensemble des patients initialement programmés dans un centre Covid de référence et inclus consécutivement, du 15 mars au 1er mai 2020 (NCT04352699). Leurs données étaient recueillies prospectivement et ultérieurement comparées à celles des patients opérés 1 an auparavant sur la même période dans ce centre. Le critère d'évaluation principal était l’admission post-opératoire en unité de soins intensifs (USI). La morbidité, la mortalité postopératoire, le report d’interventions, les tests PCR étaient évalués. Des analyses de sous-groupes étaient réalisés pour les patients opérés de cancer. Résultats: Après triage, 96 des 142 interventions programmées ont dû être reportées. Sur les opérés, 48 (68%) l’étaient pour cancer. Au total, aucun cas de pneumonie Covid-19 post-opératoire n’a été identifié. Trois patients (4 %) ont été admis en USI, dont un finalement décédé pour sepsis urinaire. Chez ces patients, les RT-PCR étaient négatives. Globalement, comparativement au groupe contrôle, aucune différence d’admission en USI, ni de taux de mortalité post-opératoire n’ont été rapportées. Conclusions: Le triage de la première vague n’a pas surexposé les patients sélectionnés à un risque de complication ou de décès post-opératoire, particulièrement pas pour ceux opérés pour cancer. En revanche, 67% des patients ont été reportés, avec un risque associé à des retard de soins pouvant conduire au décès.