No abstract

Objective: In spite of readily available evidence-based guidelines on urolithiasis treatment, practical applications of treatments vary from country to country, or even within countries. The choice of treatment depends not only on the evidence, but often on general non-medical decision factors such as infrastructure, expertise, trends, patient demands, industry drive and reimbursement levels. In turn, many of these factors are interdependent and a result of the individual National Health System. Method: In an attempt to get a crude picture of trends and practices in stone treatment across Europe, a group of well-renowned international experts in the field were asked to reply to a set of standard questions relating to stone treatments, health systems and adherence to guidelines (level of evidence D = expert opinion). Results: The above-mentioned interdependencies showed a varying picture in different countries. Overall, there is a trend away from lithotripsy and toward ureterorenoscopy. However, the choice of treatment is largely dependent on the affordability of infrastructure. Urologists may make choices based on the national reimbursement system, too. Conclusion: Without claiming to represent a scientifically sound study, this survey represents an interesting insight into a representative cross-section of European urological current practices and trends in urolithiasis treatment.

Background and Objectives:To evaluate the usefulness of laparoscopic varicocelectomy in the management of chronic scrotal pain.Methods:Between 2009 and 2011, 48 patients in total were treated with laparoscopic varicocelectomy for dull scrotal pain that worsened with physical activity and was attributed to varicoceles. All patients were followed up at 3 and 6 months and biannually thereafter with a physical examination, visual analog scale score, and ultrasonographic scan in selected cases.Results:The mean age was 38.2 years (range, 23–54 years). The mean follow-up period was 19.6 months (range, 6–26 months). Bilateral varicoceles were present in 7 patients (14.6%), and a unilateral varicocele was present in 41 (85.4%). The varicocele was grade 3 in 27 patients (56.3%), grade 2 in 20 (41.6%), and grade 1 in 1 (2.1%). The mean preoperative visual analog scale score was 4.8 on a scale from 0 to 10. The mean postoperative visual analog scale score at 3 months was 0.8. After the procedure, 42 patients (87.5%) had a significant improvement in the visual analog scale score (P < .001); 5 (10.4%) had symptom improvement, although it was not statistically significant; and 1 (2.1%) remained unchanged. During follow-up, we observed 5 recurrences (10.4%) whereas de novo hydrocele formation was identified in 4 individuals (8.3%).Conclusion:Laparoscopic varicocelectomy is efficient in the treatment of symptomatic varicoceles with a low complication rate. However, careful patient selection is necessary because it appears that individuals presenting with sharp, radiating testicular pain and/or a low-grade varicocele are less likely to benefit from this procedure.

Pseudoaneurysm following flexible ureterorenoscopy has not been reported so far. The etiology remains unclear as high intra-renal pressure, direct laser damage and damage through stiff guidewire puncture had all been avoided. We like to share this case to make urologists aware of this unusual complication and discuss possible causes and therapeutic approaches.

No abstract

ObjectiveTo assess the image quality using the portable OTV-SI (Olympus, Southend, UK) light source system compared to a dedicated fixed standard stack system for flexible ureterorenoscopy (URS) as judged by the human eye.MethodsWe compared two differing flexible URS set-ups. The first was our normal completely digital fixed set-up, comprising a flexible ureteroscope and matching digital stack system (CLV-S40 PRO-6E, Olympus). The second set-up comprised the same digital ureteroscope but with a conventional non-digital stack system and the OTV-SI portable light source. Seven experienced urologists were asked to subjectively assess the quality of the video sequences with the naked eye. The image qualities assessed were as follows: colour, distortion, graininess, depth perception, contrast, and glare. Finally, they were asked to guess whether they were observing images from the normal fixed set-up or the portable set-up. Fisher’s exact test was used to compare the two sets of nominal variables.ResultsThere were no significant differences in the observation ratings between the fixed and portable systems, independent of observer or image settings. Also, the surgeons were not able to correctly guess which stack system had been used.ConclusionFor flexible URS imaging, the combination of a digital ureteroscope with a conventional non-digital stack system together with the OTV-SI portable light source was subjectively found not to be inferior to the completely digital fixed set-up. Thus, the cheaper and smaller portable system could be considered as an economical option without substantial loss of image quality, especially useful in developing countries.