5 research outputs found

    Laparoscopic Simple Prostatectomy

    Get PDF
    Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is the most common benign tumor and cause of urinary retention in middle-aged male patients. Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the gold standard surgical treatment for benign prostatic obstruction. Although widely performed, TURP is associated with significant morbidity. Open prostatectomy is performed in larger glands, which are more than 80 grams, with higher morbidity. Advances in technology, such as holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and KTP laser vaporization, are other options that are widely used despite their limitations. Laparoscopic simple prostatectomy (LSP) is a minimally invasive treatment option with equivalent functional outcomes and is useful in larger prostatic adenomas, with low morbidity in experienced hands

    A multi-institutional European comparative study of open versus robotic-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation in children with high grade (IV–V) vesicoureteral reflux

    Get PDF
    Introduction: Traditionally, open ureteral reimplantation (OUR) has been the standard treatment for primary vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) requiring reimplantation. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation (RALUR) is gaining popularity and high success rates have been reported. Objective: In this multi-institutional study, we aimed to compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes of OUR and RALUR for high-grade (IV + V) VUR in children. Study design: A retrospective evaluation was performed collecting data from 135 children (0–18 years) who underwent high grade VUR surgical correction at nine European institutions between 01/01/2009 and 01/12/2020, involving either open or robotic approaches. Institutional review board approval was obtained. Patients with lower grades of VUR (≀III), previous history of open or endoscopic ureteral surgery, neurogenic bladder, or refluxing megaureter in need of ureteral tapering were excluded. Pre-, peri- and post-operative data were statistically compared. Results: Overall, 135 children who underwent either OUR (n = 68), or RALUR (n = 67) were included, and their clinic and demographic features were collected. The mean age of the open group was 11 months (interquartile range [IQR] 9.9–16.6 months), in the RALUR group it was 59 months (IQR 29–78mo) (p &lt; 0.01); the open cohort had a weight of 11 kg (IQR 9.9–16.6 kg) while the RALUR group had 19 kg (IQR 13–25 kg) (p &lt; 0.01). No significant differences were found for intraoperative (1.5 % vs 7.5 %, p = 0.09) or for postoperative complication rates (7.4 % vs 9 %, p = 0.15). Favorable outcomes were reported in the RALUR group: shorter time to stooling (1 vs 2 days), fewer indwelling urethral catheter days (1 vs 5 days), perioperative drain insertion time (1 vs 5 days) and a shorter length of hospital stay (2 vs 5 days) (p &lt; 0.01). The success rate was 94.0 % and 98.5 % in the open and RALUR groups, respectively. The long-term clinical success rates from both groups was comparable:42 vs 23 months for open and RALUR, respectively. Discussion: This study reported a large multicentric experience focusing on high grade VUR. Furthermore, this study compares favorably to OUR in a safety analysis. There was also a trend towards higher success rates with RALUR utilizing an extravesical approach which has not been previously reported. Conclusion: RALUR is an efficacious and safe platform to use during ureteral reimplantation for high grade VUR. The overall peri-operative and post-operative complication rates are at least equivalent to OUR, but it is associated with a faster functional recovery and time to discharge. Medium to long term success rates are also equivalent to OUR.</p

    Long-term efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (Li-ESWT) protocols in the treatment of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) patients

    No full text
    AbstractAim This study aims to evaluate the long-term effectiveness of Li-ESWT in chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) patients and to compare the effect of treatment protocol differences on success.Method Between December 2019 and January 2021, the data of male patients over the age of 18 who applied to the urology outpatient clinic with CP/CPPS symptoms were retrospectively analyzed. International Prostate Symptom Index (IPSS) and International Index of Erectile Function—Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) questionnaires were filled in for the evaluation of erectile function. All patients received treatment with the Medispect Bold Li-ESWT. The treatment responses of the patients who received a total of 6 sessions from one session per week and 12 sessions from two sessions per week were compared.Results A total of 129 patients were included in the study. Significant improvements were observed in the NIH-CPSI, IPSS, and IIEF-EF scores at the third month follow-ups of the patients after EWST (p < 0.001 for each). Improvements in scores were also found to be significant in NIH-CPSI, IPSS, and IIEF-EF at the 12th month evaluation. When the patients were evaluated according to the number of Li-ESWT sessions they received, the IPSS score average of the patient group who received 12 sessions of Li-ESWT was found to be lower than the patients who received 6 sessions of Li-ESWT (5.67 ± 2, 30 vs 4.51 ± 2.21; p = 0.005). There was no significant difference in the IIEF-EF and IPSS scores in the 12th month evaluations of the patients, but the mean NIH-CPSI score was found to be higher in the group that received 12 sessions of Li-ESWT (p = 0.003).Conclusion Li-ESWT in the treatment of CP/CPPS patients shows positive improvements in urinary symptoms, erectile function, and quality of life in patients unresponsive to other medical treatments. The increase in the number of sessions does not seem to influence the symptoms of the patients

    A multi-institutional European comparative study of open versus robotic-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation in children with high grade (IV–V) vesicoureteral reflux

    Get PDF
    Introduction: Traditionally, open ureteral reimplantation (OUR) has been the standard treatment for primary vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) requiring reimplantation. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation (RALUR) is gaining popularity and high success rates have been reported. Objective: In this multi-institutional study, we aimed to compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes of OUR and RALUR for high-grade (IV + V) VUR in children. Study design: A retrospective evaluation was performed collecting data from 135 children (0–18 years) who underwent high grade VUR surgical correction at nine European institutions between 01/01/2009 and 01/12/2020, involving either open or robotic approaches. Institutional review board approval was obtained. Patients with lower grades of VUR (≀III), previous history of open or endoscopic ureteral surgery, neurogenic bladder, or refluxing megaureter in need of ureteral tapering were excluded. Pre-, peri- and post-operative data were statistically compared. Results: Overall, 135 children who underwent either OUR (n = 68), or RALUR (n = 67) were included, and their clinic and demographic features were collected. The mean age of the open group was 11 months (interquartile range [IQR] 9.9–16.6 months), in the RALUR group it was 59 months (IQR 29–78mo) (p < 0.01); the open cohort had a weight of 11 kg (IQR 9.9–16.6 kg) while the RALUR group had 19 kg (IQR 13–25 kg) (p < 0.01). No significant differences were found for intraoperative (1.5 % vs 7.5 %, p = 0.09) or for postoperative complication rates (7.4 % vs 9 %, p = 0.15). Favorable outcomes were reported in the RALUR group: shorter time to stooling (1 vs 2 days), fewer indwelling urethral catheter days (1 vs 5 days), perioperative drain insertion time (1 vs 5 days) and a shorter length of hospital stay (2 vs 5 days) (p < 0.01). The success rate was 94.0 % and 98.5 % in the open and RALUR groups, respectively. The long-term clinical success rates from both groups was comparable:42 vs 23 months for open and RALUR, respectively. Discussion: This study reported a large multicentric experience focusing on high grade VUR. Furthermore, this study compares favorably to OUR in a safety analysis. There was also a trend towards higher success rates with RALUR utilizing an extravesical approach which has not been previously reported. Conclusion: RALUR is an efficacious and safe platform to use during ureteral reimplantation for high grade VUR. The overall peri-operative and post-operative complication rates are at least equivalent to OUR, but it is associated with a faster functional recovery and time to discharge. Medium to long term success rates are also equivalent to OUR
    corecore