Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is considered the treatment of choice for large urinary calculi and staghorn lithiasis. The approach for this surgery may be either supine or prone, and different access techniques are described in the literature with the use of ultrasound, fluoroscopy, or both combined. We believe that prone PCNL offers to the urologist key advantages, such as the possibility of puncturing anatomically abnormal urinary tracts, to perform multiple percutaneous tracts in the same kidney, experiencing the vacuum cleaner effect, ease of exploring the upper calyx through the inferior calyx, possibility to perform endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery (ECIRS) and bilateral simultaneous surgery, and to performed over local anesthesia. An adequate training for the endourologist should include both the prone and supine techniques for PCNL and to know which patient can benefit the most from each one.
This article reports the case of a 22-year-old woman with right renal angiomyolipoma (AML) and inferior vena cava thrombus. Laparoscopic right nephrectomy and thrombectomy were performed. To the authors' knowledge there have been only 46 reported cases of renal AML with endovascular extension and this is the first case to be completely removed by a laparoscopic approach. Laparoscopic management of this kind of tumour is feasible in spite of the vascular involvement. The centre's experience and enlargement of the tumour are key points for this approach.
La teleconsulta ha sido valorada con un alto grado de satisfacción durante la pandemia COVID-19, ofreciendo asistencia continuada a los pacientes urológicos durante la crisis sanitaria. La calidad percibida ofrece un campo de asistencia telemática opcional en pacientes seleccionados, que debe reevaluarse fuera de una situación de confinamiento.
Introduction
The global pandemic of COVID-19 has led to rapid implementation of telemedicine, but there is little information on patient satisfaction of this system as an alternative to face-to-face care.
Objective
To evaluate urological patient satisfaction with teleconsultation during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Material and methods
Observational, prospective, cross-sectional, non-interventional study carried out by telephone survey during the period considered as the peak of the pandemic (March-April 2020). A quality survey composed of 11 questions on urological care provided by physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic was conducted, selecting a representative sample of patients attended by teleconsultation.
Results
Two hundred patients were contacted by telephone to answer a survey on the quality of teleconsultation. The distribution of patients surveyed among the specialized consultations was homogeneous with the number of consultations cited in the period;18% of them required assistance from family members. Sixty percent of patients avoided going to a medical center during the pandemic. Of the surveyed patients, 42% had cancelled diagnostic tests, 59% had cancelled medical consultations, 3.5% had cancelled treatments and 1%, had cancelled interventions. Ten percent reported a worsening of urological symptoms during confinement. According to physicians, consultations were effectively delivered in 72% of cases, with teleconsultation being carried out by their usual urologist in 81%. Teleconsultation overall satisfaction level was 9 (IQI 8−10), and 61.5% of respondents consider teleconsultation as a "health care option" after the healthcare crisis.
Conclusion
Teleconsultation has been evaluated with a high level of satisfaction during the COVID-19 pandemic, offering continuous care to urological patients during the healthcare crisis. The perceived quality offers a field of optional telematic assistance in selected patients, which should be re-evaluated in a period without confinement measures.
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.