PMUC did not reflect the microbiological environment found in stones and urine directly obtained from the renal pelvis. Patients with postoperative infectious complications had negative PMUC with positive RPUC or RSC. RPUC and RSC can help guide prompt and appropriate antibiotic treatment for patients who develop postoperative infectious complications after PCNL.
Percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PNL) is actually the first therapeutic option to resolve complex renal stones. Our department initiated its experience in 1985 and treated the first 585 patients in ventral decubitus, as the original technique was described. Then, in 1998, the dorsal decubitus was adopted (Valdivia Uria), in which 695 patients were treated. Since 2006 the Valdivia Galdakao variant has been used. The Valdivia Galdakao position is an intermediate dorsal decubitus with extension of its homolateral lower limb and flexion of the contralateral. It is a practical way to place the patient for percutaneous renal surgery, avoiding hyperextensions and hyperflexions that can result in articular damage. It preserves cardiovascular and ventilatory dynamics and allows a better access to the respiratory tract. In this position, the bowel slips away from the puncture area lowering the risk of its damage. A single lumbar and genital sterile surgical field is created allowing antegrade and retrograde simultaneous endoscopic and even laparoscopic access, increasing efficiency and safety of the minimal invasive procedures. Between April 2006 and March 2008, 175 PNLs were performed in our department with the patient in Valdivia Galdakao position. The aim of this article is to describe our experience in this decubitus confirming that the Valdivia Galdakao is a safe, practical and versatile position that should be considered as first choice when a percutaneous renal surgery is indicated.
Kinesic perineal exercises before radical prostatectomy did not diminish the times of urinary continence recovery or its appearance.
The new disease COVID-19 pandemic has completely modified our lifestyle, changing our personal habits and daily activities and strongly our professional activity. Following World Health Organization (WHO) and health care authorities around the World recommendations, all elective surgeries from benign diagnose procedures must be postponed and imperatively continue working on emergent and oncological urgent pathologies. Surgical elective treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is not considered as a priority. During BPH endoscopic surgeries, urine and blood are mixed with the irrigation liquid implying a risk of viral presence. Furthermore, a steam and smoke bubble is being accumulated inside the bladder implying the risk of splashing and aerosols. The risks of other viral infections have been identified during endourological procedures and they are related to splashing events. Several studies observed 33-100% of splashing on goggles. All BPH endoscopic procedures must be postponed. In case of complete urinary obstruction, this event can be adequately treated by urethral or suprapubic catheter under local anesthesia. As soon as local COVID-19 prevalence decreases, endourological procedures could be restarted. As protocols are being validating around the World to redeem elective surgeries, a symptomatic obstructed patient could be operated knowing his COVID-19 status with a molecular PCR, a cleaned epidemiological interview with a normal preoperative protocol. If patient is COVID-19+, surgery must be delayed until complete recovery, because mortality could increase as Lei from Wuhan describes. Informed consent must include risks of complications related to COVID-19 disease. Surgery must be performed by an experienced surgeon in order to avoid increase of operating time and risks of complications. Surgical approach of BPH must be considered depending on availability of disposable material, infrastructure, and the epidemiological COVID-19 status of your area. The main aim is patients and healthcare staff safety.
To compare the oncological outcomes of patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) undergoing kidney-sparing surgery (KSS) with fibre-optic (FO) vs digital (D) ureteroscopy (URS). To evaluate the oncological impact of imageenhancement technologies such as narrow-band imaging (NBI) and Image1-S in patients with UTUC. Patients and MethodsThe Clinical Research Office of the Endourology Society (CROES)-UTUC registry is an international, multicentre, cohort study prospectively collecting data on patients with UTUC. Patients undergoing flexible FO-or D-URS for diagnostic or diagnostic and treatment purposes were included. Differences between groups in terms of overall survival (OS) and diseasefree survival (DFS) were evaluated. ResultsThe CROES registry included 2380 patients from 101 centres and 37 countries, of whom 401 patients underwent URS (FO-URS 186 and D-URS 215). FO-URS were performed more frequently for diagnostic purposes, while D-URS was peformed when a combined diagnostic and treatment strategy was planned. Intra-and postoperative complications did not differ between the groups. The 5-year OS and DFS rates were 91.5% and 66.4%, respectively. The mean OS was 42 months for patients receiving FO-URS and 39 months for those undergoing D-URS (P = 0.9); the mean DFS was 28 months in the FO-URS group and 21 months in the D-URS group (P < 0.001). In patients who received URS with treatment purposes, there were no differences in OS (P = 0.9) and DFS (P = 0.7). NBI and Image1-S technologies did not improve OS or DFS over D-URS. ConclusionsD-URS did not provide any oncological advantage over FO-URS. Similarly, no differences in terms of OS and DFS were found when image-enhancement technologies were compared to D-URS. These findings underline the importance of surgeon skills and experience, and reinforce the need for the centralisation of UTUC care.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.