Tag Archive for: Article of the Week

Posts

Article of the Week: Assessing the impact of various treatment optimisation strategies in SWL

Every week the Editor-in-Chief selects the Article of the Week from the current issue of BJUI. The abstract is reproduced below and you can click on the button to read the full article, which is freely available to all readers for at least 30 days from the time of this post.

In addition to the article itself, there is an accompanying editorial written by a prominent member of the urological community. This blog is intended to provoke comment and discussion and we invite you to use the comment tools at the bottom of each post to join the conversation.

Finally, the third post under the Article of the Week heading on the homepage will consist of additional material or media. This week we feature a video from Mr Mahesh Desai discussing his paper. 

If you only have time to read one article this week, it should be this one.

Evolution of shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) technique: a 25-year single centre experience of >5000 patients

Jitendra Jagtap, Shashikant Mishra, Amit Bhattu, Arvind Ganpule, Ravindra Sabnis and Mahesh Desai

Department of Urology, Muljibhai Patel Urological Hospital, Nadiad, India

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of various treatment optimisation strategies in shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) used at a single centre over the last 25 years.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 5017 patients treated between 1989 and 2013 were reviewed and divided into groups A, B, C and D for the treatment periods of 1989–1994 (1561 patients), 1995–2000 (1741), 2001–2006 (1039) and 2007–2013 (676), respectively. The Sonolith 3000 (A and B) and Dornier compact delta lithotripters (C and D) were used. Refinements included frequent re-localisation, limiting maximum shocks and booster therapy in group B and Hounsfield unit estimation, power ramping and improved coupling in group D. Parameters reviewed were annual SWL utilisation, stone and treatment data, retreatment, auxiliary procedures, complications and stone-free rate (SFR).

RESULTS

The SFR with Dornier compact delta was significantly higher than that of the Sonolith 3000 (P < 0.001). The SFR improved significantly from 77.58%, 81.28%, 82.58% to 88.02% in groups A, B, C, and D, respectively (P < 0.001). There was a concomitant decrease in repeat SWL (re-treatment rate: A, 48.7%; B, 33.4%; C, 15.8%; and D, 10.1%; P < 0.001) and complication rates (A, 8%; B, 6.4%; C, 4.9%; and D, 1.6%; P < 0.001). This led to a rise in the efficiency quotient (EQ) in groups A–D from 50.41, 58.94, 68.78 to 77.06 (P < 0.001).The auxiliary procedure rates were similar in all groups (P = 0.62).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, improvement in the EQ together with a concomitant decrease in complication rate can be achieved with optimum patient selection and use of various treatment optimising strategies.

 

Editorial: Evolution of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL)

Much has changed since the introduction of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL); however, in many ways the principles remain constant. This manuscript by Jagtap et al. [1] is a large series of patients over 25 years and encapsulates the changes in ESWL over that time. This paper has all the limitations inherent in a retrospective review but within this offers interesting data. In particular the use of two different machines and refinements in technique are eloquently described. This shows an improvement due to both the change in technology but also in the importance of modifications of technique. The particular factors improving stone-free rate (SFR) were; better localisation with ultrasonography and X-ray, better coupling and use of coupling gel, change in selection criteria for both the patient and stone, ramping up the power and a staff training programme. This emphasis on technique is especially pertinent in healthcare systems where mobile lithotripters are still in use. These are renowned to have lower SFRs than static machines, which may be due to the technical delivery of treatment as much as the efficacy of the lithotripter.

What is the future for ESWL? The paper reflects the perception globally that whilst the incidence of urolithiasis is increasing, the use of ESWL is not increasing at the same rate, particularly for ureteric stones, and they cite the potential factors for this. This has also been noted in the UK and our own recent review of Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data even suggest the rate of ESWL has plateaued for both ureteric (3000/year) and renal (19 500/year) stones in the last 3 years [2, 3]. There has been discussion within the UK about centralising endourology services using the same model as for cancer, with provision of static lithotripters within those centres. This would potentially have the advantage of creating high-volume centres with quality being easier to standardise and monitor; however, this would have to be balanced against patients probably having to travel further to access ESWL. The use of Hounsfield units remains a topic of debate with conflicting data and limited clinical application [4, 5]. Optimising targeting to minimise tissue damage with maximal stone fragmentation remains a challenge and modifications to lithotripters with dual-imaging modalities, dual heads, alterations in shockwave delivery rate, control of respiratory effort and novel feedback devices have had limited success. Increasing levels of obesity within developed countries are a factor in the utilisation of ESWL, as there is a limit on focal distance. All of these factors along with the continued improvement in the optics, miniaturisation of ureteroscopes and advent of holmium laser have contributed to a surge in the use of ureteroscopy, despite publications and guidelines showing similar success rates [6].

Kay Thomas

Clinical lead for Urology, Honorary Senior Lecturer Kings College London, UK

References

1 Jagtap J, Mishra S, Bhattu A, Ganpule A, Sabnis R, Desai M. Evolution of shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) technique: a 25-year single centre experience of >5000 patients. BJU Int 2014; 114: 748–53

2 Turney BW, Reynard JM, Noble JG, Keoghane SR. Trends in urological disease. BJU Int 2011; 109: 1082–7

3 Withington J. Personal communication from Royal College of Surgeons. July 2014

4 Pareek G, Armenakas A, Fracchia JA. Hounsfield units on computerized tomography predict stone free rates after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 2012; 169: 1679–81

5 Foda K, Abdeldaeim H, Youssif M, Assem A. Calculating the number of shock waves, expulsion time and optimum stone parameters based on noncontrast computerized tomography characteristics. Urology 2013; 82: 1026–31

6 Türk C, Knoll T, Petrik A et al. EAU Guidelines on Urolithiasis, 2014. Available at: https://www.uroweb.org/gls/pdf/22%20Urolithiasis_LR.pdf. Accessed July 2014

 

Video: Evolution of SWL technique. A 25 year single centre experience of over 5000 patients

Evolution of SWL technique. A 25 year single centre experience of over 5000 patients

Jitendra Jagtap, Shashikant Mishra, Amit Bhattu, Arvind Ganpule, Ravindra Sabnis and Mahesh Desai

Department of Urology, Muljibhai Patel Urological Hospital, Nadiad, India

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of various treatment optimisation strategies in shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) used at a single centre over the last 25 years.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 5017 patients treated between 1989 and 2013 were reviewed and divided into groups A, B, C and D for the treatment periods of 1989–1994 (1561 patients), 1995–2000 (1741), 2001–2006 (1039) and 2007–2013 (676), respectively. The Sonolith 3000 (A and B) and Dornier compact delta lithotripters (C and D) were used. Refinements included frequent re-localisation, limiting maximum shocks and booster therapy in group B and Hounsfield unit estimation, power ramping and improved coupling in group D. Parameters reviewed were annual SWL utilisation, stone and treatment data, retreatment, auxiliary procedures, complications and stone-free rate (SFR).

RESULTS

The SFR with Dornier compact delta was significantly higher than that of the Sonolith 3000 (P < 0.001). The SFR improved significantly from 77.58%, 81.28%, 82.58% to 88.02% in groups A, B, C, and D, respectively (P < 0.001). There was a concomitant decrease in repeat SWL (re-treatment rate: A, 48.7%; B, 33.4%; C, 15.8%; and D, 10.1%; P < 0.001) and complication rates (A, 8%; B, 6.4%; C, 4.9%; and D, 1.6%; P < 0.001). This led to a rise in the efficiency quotient (EQ) in groups A–D from 50.41, 58.94, 68.78 to 77.06 (P < 0.001).The auxiliary procedure rates were similar in all groups (P = 0.62).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, improvement in the EQ together with a concomitant decrease in complication rate can be achieved with optimum patient selection and use of various treatment optimising strategies.

 

Article of the Week: Identifying predictors of renal function decline after surgery

Every week the Editor-in-Chief selects the Article of the Week from the current issue of BJUI. The abstract is reproduced below and you can click on the button to read the full article, which is freely available to all readers for at least 30 days from the time of this post.

In addition to the article itself, there is an accompanying editorial written by a prominent member of the urological community. This blog is intended to provoke comment and discussion and we invite you to use the comment tools at the bottom of each post to join the conversation.

If you only have time to read one article this week, it should be this one.

Preoperative predictors of renal function decline after radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma

Matthew Kaag, Landon Trost*, R. Houston Thompson*, Ricardo Favaretto†, Vanessa Elliott, Shahrokh F. Shariat‡, Alexandra Maschino†, Emily Vertosick†, Jay D. Raman and Guido Dalbagni†

Penn State Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, *Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, †Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA, and ‡Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

OBJECTIVES

To model renal function after radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) for upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). To identify predictors of renal function decline after surgery, thereby allowing the identification of patients likely to be ineligible for cisplatin-based chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively identified 374 patients treated with RNU for UTUC at three centres between 1995 and 2010. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was calculated using Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation before RNU and at early (1–5 months after RNU) and late (>5 months) time points after RNU. Only patients deemed eligible for cisplatin-based chemotherapy before RNU (preoperative glomerular filtration rate [GFR] ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2) were included. Multivariable analysis identified the preoperative predictors of eGFR after RNU at early postoperative and late postoperative time points.

RESULTS
A total of 163 patients had an eligible early post-RNU eGFR measurement and 172 had an eligible late eGFR measurement. The median eGFR declined by 32% and did not show a significant trend toward recovery over time (P = 0.4). On multivariable analysis preoperative eGFR and patient age were significantly associated with early and late postoperative eGFR, while Charlson comorbidity index score was significantly associated with late postoperative eGFR alone.
 

CONCLUSIONS
In patients with normal preoperative eGFR (≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2), renal function decreases by one-third after RNU and does not show evidence of recovery over time. Elderly patients and those with pre-RNU eGFR closer to 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (lower eGFR in the present cohort) are more likely to be ineligible for adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy regimens because of renal function loss after RNU.

 

 

Article of the Month: One-stop clinic for ketamine-associated uropathy

Every week the Editor-in-Chief selects the Article of the Week from the current issue of BJUI. The abstract is reproduced below and you can click on the button to read the full article, which is freely available to all readers for at least 30 days from the time of this post.

In addition to the article itself, there is an accompanying editorial written by a prominent member of the urological community. This blog is intended to provoke comment and discussion and we invite you to use the comment tools at the bottom of each post to join the conversation.

If you only have time to read one article this week, it should be this one.

One-stop clinic for ketamine-associated uropathy: report on service delivery model, patients’ characteristics and non-invasive investigations at baseline by a cross-sectional study in a prospective cohort of 318 teenagers and young adults

Yuk-Him Tam*, Chi-Fai Ng*, Kristine Kit-Yi Pang*, Chi-Hang Yee*, Winnie Chiu-Wing Chu†, Vivian Yee-Fong Leung†, Grace Lai-Hung Wong‡, Vincent Wai-Sun Wong‡, Henry Lik-Yuen Chan‡ and Paul Bo-San Lai*

Departments of *Surgery, Youth Urological Treatment Centre, †Imaging and Interventional Radiology, and ‡Medicine and Therapeutics, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China

OBJECTIVE

To describe a service delivery model and report the baseline characteristics of patients investigated by a non-invasive approach for ketamine-associated uropathy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study in a prospective cohort of patients who attended their first visit and underwent non-invasive investigations at a dedicated centre to treat ketamine-associated uropathy in Hong Kong from December 2011 to July 2013. Data on demographics, illicit ketamine use, symptoms scores and voiding function parameters at baseline were prospectively collected. Differences between active abusers and ex-abusers, and risk factors for the most symptomatic group were investigated by univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

In all, 318 patients completed the non-invasive assessment at their first visit and were eligible for inclusion. In all, 174 were female and the mean (sd) age of the entire cohort was 24.4 (3.1) years. Patients had used ketamine for a mean (sd) period of 81 (36) months. The mean (sd) ketamine use per week was 18.5 (15.8) g. In all, 214 patients were active abusers while 104 were ex-abusers but had persistent lower urinary tract symptoms. The mean (sd) voided volume, bladder capacity, and bladder emptying efficiency were 111.5 (110) mL, 152.5 (126) mL and 73.3 (26.9)%, respectively. The ex-abusers had a lower symptom score (19.3 vs 24.1; P < 0.001), a larger voided volume (126 vs 85 mL; P < 0.001), and a larger bladder capacity (204.8 vs 126.7 mL; P < 0.001) compared with active abusers. Multivariate analysis found female gender was associated with a higher symptom score (odds ratio [OR] 2.39; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.35–4.23; P = 0.003) and a smaller voided volume (OR 1.9; 95% CI 1.1–3.3; P = 0.02). Ketamine taken (g/week) was another risk factor for a higher symptom score (OR 1.03; 95% CI 1.01–1.05; P = 0.002). Status of ex-abuser was the only protective factor associated with fewer symptoms, larger voided volume and bladder capacity.

CONCLUSIONS

An effective service model for recruiting patients with ketamine-associated uropathy is possible. With such a service model as a platform, further prospective studies are warranted to investigate the appropriate choice of treatment for this new clinical entity.

Article of the Week: Learning curves for urological procedures – a systematic review

Every week the Editor-in-Chief selects the Article of the Week from the current issue of BJUI. The abstract is reproduced below and you can click on the button to read the full article, which is freely available to all readers for at least 30 days from the time of this post.

In addition to the article itself, there is an accompanying editorial written by a prominent member of the urological community. This blog is intended to provoke comment and discussion and we invite you to use the comment tools at the bottom of each post to join the conversation.

If you only have time to read one article this week, it should be this one.

Learning curves for urological procedures: a systematic review

Hamid Abboudi, Mohammed Shamim Khan, Khurshid A. Guru*, Saied Froghi†, Gunter de Win‡, Hendrik Van Poppel§, Prokar Dasgupta and Kamran Ahmed

MRC Centre for Transplantation, King’s College London, King’s Health Partners, Department of Urology, Guy’s Hospital, London, UK, *Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA, †The Oxford Cancer Centre, Oxford University, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK, ‡Department of Urology, University Hospital Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium, and §Department of Urology, University Hospital, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

OBJECTIVE
  • To determine the number of cases a urological surgeon must complete to achieve proficiency for various urological procedures.
PATIENT AND METHODS
  • The MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO databases were systematically searched for studies published up to December 2011.
  • Studies pertaining to learning curves of urological procedures were included.
  • Two reviewers independently identified potentially relevant articles.
  • Procedure name, statistical analysis, procedure setting, number of participants, outcomes and learning curves were analysed.
RESULTS
  • Forty-four studies described the learning curve for different urological procedures.
  • The learning curve for open radical prostatectomy ranged from 250 to 1000 cases and for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy from 200 to 750 cases.
  • The learning curve for robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) has been reported to be 40 procedures as a minimum number.
  • Robot-assisted radical cystectomy has a documented learning curve of 16–30 cases, depending on which outcome variable is measured.
  • Irrespective of previous laparoscopic experience, there is a significant reduction in operating time (P = 0.008), estimated blood loss (P = 0.008) and complication rates (P = 0.042) after 100 RALPs.
CONCLUSIONS
  • The available literature can act as a guide to the learning curves of trainee urologists. Although the learning curve may vary among individual surgeons, a consensus should exist for the minimum number of cases to achieve proficiency.
  • The complexities associated with defining procedural competence are vast.
  • The majority of learning curve trials have focused on the latest surgical techniques and there is a paucity of data pertaining to basic urological procedures.

Article of the Week: Assessing prostate cancer brachytherapy using patient-reported outcomes

Every week the Editor-in-Chief selects the Article of the Week from the current issue of BJUI. The abstract is reproduced below and you can click on the button to read the full article, which is freely available to all readers for at least 30 days from the time of this post.

In addition to the article itself, there is an accompanying editorial written by a prominent member of the urological community. This blog is intended to provoke comment and discussion and we invite you to use the comment tools at the bottom of each post to join the conversation.

Finally, the third post under the Article of the Week heading on the homepage will consist of additional material or media. This week we feature a video from Dr. James Talcott discussing his paper. 

If you only have time to read one article this week, it should be this one.

Using Patient-Reported Outcomes to Assess and Improve Prostate Cancer Brachytherapy

James A. Talcott 1, 2, 10, 11, Judith Manola 3, Ronald C. Chen 4, Jack A. Clark 5, 6, Irving Kaplan 7, 8, Anthony V. D’Amico 8, 11 and Anthony L. Zietman 9, 11

1 Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA, 2 Continuum Cancer Centers of New York, New York, NY, 3 Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, 4 Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 5 Center for Health Quality, Outcomes, and Economic Research, Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial Veterans Hospital, Bedford, MA, 6 Boston University School of Public Health, 7 Beth Israel-Deaconess Medical Center, 8 Brigham and Women’s Hospital, 9 Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, 10 Albert Einstein School of Medicine, New York, NY, and 11 Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

OBJECTIVE
  • To describe a successful quality improvement process that arose from unexpected differences in control groups’ short-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) within a comparative effectiveness study of a prostate brachytherapy technique intended to reduce urinary morbidity.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
  • Patients planning prostate brachytherapy at one of three institutions were enrolled in a prospective cohort study.
  • Patients were surveyed using a validated instrument to assess treatment-related toxicity before treatment and at pre-specified intervals.
  • Unexpectedly, urinary PROs were worse in one of two standard brachytherapy technique control populations (US-BT1 and US-BT2). Therefore, we collaboratively reviewed treatment procedures, identified a discrepancy in technique, made a corrective modification, and evaluated the change.
RESULTS
  • The patient groups were demographically and clinically similar.
  • In the first preliminary analysis, US-BT2 patients reported significantly more short-term post-treatment urinary symptoms than US-BTpatients.
  • The studies treating physicians reviewed the US-BT1 and US-BT2 treatment protocols and found that they differed in whether they used an indwelling urinary catheter.
  • After adopting the US-BT1 approach, short-term urinary morbidity in US-BT2 patients decreased significantly. Brachytherapy procedures were otherwise unchanged.
CONCLUSION
  • Many procedures in cancer treatments are not evaluated, resulting in practice variation and suboptimal outcomes. Patients, the primary medical consumers, provide little direct input in evaluations of their care.
  • We used PROs, a sensitive and valid measure of treatment-related toxicity, for quality assessment and quality improvement (QA/QI) of prostate brachytherapy. This serendipitous patient-centred QA/QI process may be a useful model for empirically evaluating complex cancer treatment procedures and for screening for substandard care.

Video: PROs in Prostate Brachytherapy

Using Patient-Reported Outcomes to Assess and Improve Prostate Cancer Brachytherapy

James A. Talcott 1, 2, 10, 11, Judith Manola 3, Ronald C. Chen 4, Jack A. Clark 5, 6, Irving Kaplan 7, 8, Anthony V. D’Amico 8, 11 and Anthony L. Zietman 9, 11

1 Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA, 2 Continuum Cancer Centers of New York, New York, NY, 3 Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, 4 Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 5 Center for Health Quality, Outcomes, and Economic Research, Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial Veterans Hospital, Bedford, MA, 6 Boston University School of Public Health, 7 Beth Israel-Deaconess Medical Center, 8 Brigham and Women’s Hospital, 9 Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, 10 Albert Einstein School of Medicine, New York, NY, and 11 Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

OBJECTIVE
  • To describe a successful quality improvement process that arose from unexpected differences in control groups’ short-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) within a comparative effectiveness study of a prostate brachytherapy technique intended to reduce urinary morbidity.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
  • Patients planning prostate brachytherapy at one of three institutions were enrolled in a prospective cohort study.
  • Patients were surveyed using a validated instrument to assess treatment-related toxicity before treatment and at pre-specified intervals.
  • Unexpectedly, urinary PROs were worse in one of two standard brachytherapy technique control populations (US-BT1 and US-BT2). Therefore, we collaboratively reviewed treatment procedures, identified a discrepancy in technique, made a corrective modification, and evaluated the change.
RESULTS
  • The patient groups were demographically and clinically similar.
  • In the first preliminary analysis, US-BT2 patients reported significantly more short-term post-treatment urinary symptoms than US-BTpatients.
  • The studies treating physicians reviewed the US-BT1 and US-BT2 treatment protocols and found that they differed in whether they used an indwelling urinary catheter.
  • After adopting the US-BT1 approach, short-term urinary morbidity in US-BT2 patients decreased significantly. Brachytherapy procedures were otherwise unchanged.
CONCLUSION
  • Many procedures in cancer treatments are not evaluated, resulting in practice variation and suboptimal outcomes. Patients, the primary medical consumers, provide little direct input in evaluations of their care.
  • We used PROs, a sensitive and valid measure of treatment-related toxicity, for quality assessment and quality improvement (QA/QI) of prostate brachytherapy. This serendipitous patient-centred QA/QI process may be a useful model for empirically evaluating complex cancer treatment procedures and for screening for substandard care.

Article of the Week: Centralized histopathological review in penile cancer. Should this be the global standard?

Every week the Editor-in-Chief selects the Article of the Week from the current issue of BJUI. The abstract is reproduced below and you can click on the button to read the full article, which is freely available to all readers for at least 30 days from the time of this post.

In addition to the article itself, there is an accompanying editorial written by a prominent member of the urological community. This blog is intended to provoke comment and discussion and we invite you to use the comment tools at the bottom of each post to join the conversation.

If you only have time to read one article this week, it should be this one.

Should centralized histopathological review in penile cancer be the global standard?

Vincent Tang, Laurence Clarke, Zara Gall, Jonathan H. Shanks, Daisuke, Nonaka, Nigel J. Parr, P. Anthony Elliott, Noel W. Clarke, Vijay Ramani, Maurice W. Lau and Vijay K. Sangar

The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester and the *Royal Bolton NHS Foundation Trust, Bolton, UK

OBJECTIVE
  • To assess the role of centralized pathological review in penile cancer management.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
  • Newly diagnosed squamous cell carcinomas (SCC) of the penis, including squamous cell carcinoma in situ (CIS), from biopsy specimens were referred from 15 centres to the regional supra-network multidisciplinary team (Sn-MDT) between 1 January 2008 and 30 March 2011.
  • Biopsy histology reports and slides from the respective referring hospitals were reviewed by the Sn-MDT pathologists.
  • The biopsy specimens’ histological type, grade and stage reported by the Sn-MDT pathologist were compared with those given in the referring hospital pathology report, as well as with definitive surgery histology.
  • Any changes in histological diagnosis were sub-divided into critical changes (i.e. those that could alter management) and non-critical changes (i.e. those that would not affect management).
RESULTS
  • A total of 155 cases of squamous cell carcinoma or CIS of the penis were referred from 15 different centres in North-West England.
  • After review by the Sn-MDT, the histological diagnosis was changed in 31% of cases and this difference was statistically significant. A total of 60.4% of the changes were deemed to be critical changes that resulted in a significant change in management.
  • When comparing the biopsy histology reported by the Sn-MDT with the final histology from the definitive surgical specimens, a good correlation was generally found.
CONCLUSIONS
  • In the present study a significant proportion of penile cancer histology reports were revised after review by the Sn-MDT. Many of these changes altered patient management.
  • The present study shows that accurate pathological diagnosis plays a crucial role in determining the correct treatment and maximizing the potential for good clinical outcomes in penile cancer.
  • In the case of histopathology, centralization has increased exposure to penile cancer and thereby increased diagnostic accuracy, and should therefore be considered the ‘gold standard’.

Article of the week: RP is safe in patients taking aspirin

Every week the Editor-in-Chief selects the Article of the Week from the current issue of BJUI. The abstract is reproduced below and you can click on the button to read the full article, which is freely available to all readers for at least 30 days from the time of this post.

In addition to the article itself, there is an accompanying editorial written by a prominent member of the urological community. This blog is intended to provoke comment and discussion and we invite you to use the comment tools at the bottom of each post to join the conversation.

Finally, the third post under the Article of the Week heading on the homepage will consist of additional material or media. This week we feature a video from Mr. Sami-Ramzi Leyh-Bannurah discussing his paper.

If you only have time to read one article this week, it should be this one.

Open and robot-assisted radical retropubic prostatectomy in men receiving ongoing low-dose aspirin medication: revisiting an old paradigm?

Sami-Ramzi Leyh-Bannurah, Jens Hansen, Hendrik Isbarn, Thomas Steuber, Pierre Tennstedt, Uwe Michl, Thorsten Schlomm*, Alexander Haese, Hans Heinzer, Hartwig Huland, Markus Graefen and Lars Budäus

Martini Clinic, Prostate Cancer Center at University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, and *Department of Urology, Section for Translational Prostate Cancer Research, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany

OBJECTIVE

• To assess blood loss, transfusion rates and 90-day complication rates in patients receiving ongoing 100 mg/day aspirin medication and undergoing open radical prostatectomy (RP) or robot-assisted RP (RARP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

• Between February 2010 and August 2011, 2061 open RPs and 400 RARPs were performed. All patients received low-molecular-weight heparin for thrombembolism prophylaxis. Aspirin intake during surgery was recorded in 137 patients (5.5%).

• Descriptive statistics and multivariable analyses after propensity-score matching for balancing potential differences in patients with and without aspirin medication were used to assess the risk of blood loss above the median in patients undergoing open RP or RARP.

RESULTS

• The median blood loss in the open RP cohort with and without aspirin medication was 750 and 700 mL, respectively, and in the RARP cohort it was 200 and 150 mL, respectively. Within the same cohorts, transfusions were administered in 21 and 8% and 0 and 1% of patients, respectively.

• The 90-day complication rates in patients with ongoing aspirin medication were 5.8, 4.4, 7.3 and 0% for Clavien grades I, II, III and IV complications, respectively.

• In multivariable analyses and after propensity-score matching, prostate volume (odds ratio 1.03; 95% CI 1.02–1.04; P < 0.01) but not ongoing aspirin medication achieved independent predictor status for the risk of blood loss above the median.

CONCLUSIONS

• Major surgery such as open RP and RARP can be safely performed in patients with ongoing aspirin medication without greater blood loss.

• Higher 90-day complication rates were not detected in such patients.

• Differences in transfusion rates between the groups receiving and not receiving ongoing aspirin medication may be explained by a higher proportion of patients with coronary artery disease in the group receiving ongoing aspirin mediciation. This comorbidity may result in a higher peri-operative threshold for allogenic blood transfusion.

© 2020 BJU International. All Rights Reserved.