Risk factors of postoperative complications after radical cystectomy with continent or conduit urinary diversion in Armenia

To estimate the surgical volume and the incidence of in-hospital complications of RC in Armenia from 2005 to 2012, and to investigate potential risk factors of complications. The study utilized a retrospective chart review in a cohort of patients who had RC followed by either continent or conduit urinary diversion in all hospitals of Armenia from 2005 to 2012. A detailed chart review was conducted abstracting information on baseline demographic and clinical characteristics, surgical procedural details, postoperative management and in-hospital complications. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was applied to estimate the independent risk factors for developing ‘any postoperative complication’. The total study sample included 273 patients (mean age = 58.5 years, 93.4 % men). Overall, 28.9 % (n = 79) of patients had at least one in-hospital complication. The hospital mortality rate was 4.8 % (n = 13). The most frequent types of complications were wound-related (10.3 %), gastrointestinal (9.2 %) and infectious (7.0 %). The ischemic heart disease (OR = 3.3, 95 % CI 1.5–7.4), perioperative transfusion (OR = 2.0, 1.1–3.6), glucose level [OR = 0.71 (0.63–0.95)], and hospital type (OR = 2.3, 95 % CI 1.1–4.7) were independent predictors of postoperative complications. The rate of RC complications in Armenia was similar to those observed in other countries. Future prospective studies should evaluate the effect of RC complications on long-term outcomes and costs in Armenia. Policy recommendations should address the issues regarding surgeon training and hospital volume to decrease the risk of RC complications

Different Nerve-Sparing Techniques during Radical Prostatectomy and Their Impact on Functional Outcomes

The purpose of this narrative review is to describe the different nerve-sparing techniques applied during radical prostatectomy and document their functional impact on postoperative outcomes. We performed a PubMed search of the literature using the keywords “nerve-sparing”, “techniques”, “prostatectomy” and “outcomes”. Other potentially eligible studies were retrieved using the reference list of the included studies. Nerve-sparing techniques can be distinguished based on the fascial planes of dissection (intrafascial, interfascial or extrafascial), the direction of dissection (retrograde or antegrade), the timing of the neurovascular bundle dissection off the prostate (early vs. late release), the use of cautery, the application of traction and the number of the neurovascular bundles which are preserved. Despite this rough categorisation, many techniques have been developed which cannot be integrated in one of the categories described above. Moreover, emerging technologies have entered the nerve-sparing field, making its future even more promising. Bilateral nerve-sparing of maximal extent, athermal dissection of the neurovascular bundles with avoidance of traction and utilization of the correct planes remain the basic principles for achieving optimum functional outcomes. Given that potency and continence outcomes after radical prostatectomy are multifactorial endpoints in addition to the difficulty in their postoperative assessment and the well-documented discrepancy existing in their definition, safe conclusions about the superiority of one technique over the other cannot be easily drawn. Further studies, comparing the different nerve-sparing techniques, are necessary

New Technologies in Endourology and Laser Lithotripsy: The Need for Evidence in Comprehensive Clinical Settings

Flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) with laser lithotripsy is currently the gold standard surgical treatment for ureteral and kidney stones with a maximum diameter of 2 cm [...]

Feasibility study of a novel robotic system for transperitoneal partial nephrectomy: An in vivo experimental animal study

Purpose: To evaluate the safety and feasibility of partial nephrectomy with the use of the novel robotic system in an in vivo animal model. Methods: Right partial nephrectomy was performed in female pigs by a surgical team consisting of one surgeon and one bedside assistant. Both were experienced in laparoscopic surgery and trained in the use of the novel robotic system. The partial nephrectomies were performed using four trocars (three trocars for the robotic arms and one as an assistant trocar). The completion of the operations, set-up time, operation time, warm ischemia time (WIT) and complication events were recorded. The decrease in all variables between the first and last operation was calculated. Results: In total, eight partial nephrectomies were performed in eight female pigs. All operations were successfully completed. The median set-up time was 19.5 (range, 15-30) minutes, while the estimated median operative time was 80.5 minutes (range, 59-114). The median WIT was 23.5 minutes (range, 17-32) and intra- or postoperative complications were not observed. All variables decreased in consecutive operations. More precisely, the decrease in the set-up time was calculated to 15 minutes between the first and third attempts. The operative time was reduced by 55 minutes between the first and last operation, while the WIT was decreased by 15 minutes during the consecutive attempts. No complications were noticed in any operation. Conclusions: Using the newly introduced robotic system, all the advantages of robotic surgery are optimized and incorporated, and partial nephrectomies can be performed in a safe and effective manner

Risk factors of postoperative complications after radical cystectomy with continent or conduit urinary diversion in Armenia

Abstract To estimate the surgical volume and the incidence of in-hospital complications of RC in Armenia from 2005 to 2012, and to investigate potential risk factors of complications. The study utilized a retrospective chart review in a cohort of patients who had RC followed by either continent or conduit urinary diversion in all hospitals of Armenia from 2005 to 2012. A detailed chart review was conducted abstracting information on baseline demographic and clinical characteristics, surgical procedural details, postoperative management and in-hospital complications. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was applied to estimate the independent risk factors for developing ‘any postoperative complication’. The total study sample included 273 patients (mean age = 58.5 years, 93.4 % men). Overall, 28.9 % (n = 79) of patients had at least one in-hospital complication. The hospital mortality rate was 4.8 % (n = 13). The most frequent types of complications were wound-related (10.3 %), gastrointestinal (9.2 %) and infectious (7.0 %). The ischemic heart disease (OR = 3.3, 95 % CI 1.5–7.4), perioperative transfusion (OR = 2.0, 1.1–3.6), glucose level [OR = 0.71 (0.63–0.95)], and hospital type (OR = 2.3, 95 % CI 1.1–4.7) were independent predictors of postoperative complications. The rate of RC complications in Armenia was similar to those observed in other countries. Future prospective studies should evaluate the effect of RC complications on long-term outcomes and costs in Armenia. Policy recommendations should address the issues regarding surgeon training and hospital volume to decrease the risk of RC complications

Different Nerve-Sparing Techniques during Radical Prostatectomy and Their Impact on Functional Outcomes

The purpose of this narrative review is to describe the different nerve-sparing techniques applied during radical prostatectomy and document their functional impact on postoperative outcomes. We performed a PubMed search of the literature using the keywords “nerve-sparing”, “techniques”, “prostatectomy” and “outcomes”. Other potentially eligible studies were retrieved using the reference list of the included studies. Nerve-sparing techniques can be distinguished based on the fascial planes of dissection (intrafascial, interfascial or extrafascial), the direction of dissection (retrograde or antegrade), the timing of the neurovascular bundle dissection off the prostate (early vs. late release), the use of cautery, the application of traction and the number of the neurovascular bundles which are preserved. Despite this rough categorisation, many techniques have been developed which cannot be integrated in one of the categories described above. Moreover, emerging technologies have entered the nerve-sparing field, making its future even more promising. Bilateral nerve-sparing of maximal extent, athermal dissection of the neurovascular bundles with avoidance of traction and utilization of the correct planes remain the basic principles for achieving optimum functional outcomes. Given that potency and continence outcomes after radical prostatectomy are multifactorial endpoints in addition to the difficulty in their postoperative assessment and the well-documented discrepancy existing in their definition, safe conclusions about the superiority of one technique over the other cannot be easily drawn. Further studies, comparing the different nerve-sparing techniques, are necessary

Different Nerve-Sparing Techniques during Radical Prostatectomy and Their Impact on Functional Outcomes

The purpose of this narrative review is to describe the different nerve-sparing techniques applied during radical prostatectomy and document their functional impact on postoperative outcomes. We performed a PubMed search of the literature using the keywords “nerve-sparing”, “techniques”, “prostatectomy” and “outcomes”. Other potentially eligible studies were retrieved using the reference list of the included studies. Nerve-sparing techniques can be distinguished based on the fascial planes of dissection (intrafascial, interfascial or extrafascial), the direction of dissection (retrograde or antegrade), the timing of the neurovascular bundle dissection off the prostate (early vs. late release), the use of cautery, the application of traction and the number of the neurovascular bundles which are preserved. Despite this rough categorisation, many techniques have been developed which cannot be integrated in one of the categories described above. Moreover, emerging technologies have entered the nerve-sparing field, making its future even more promising. Bilateral nerve-sparing of maximal extent, athermal dissection of the neurovascular bundles with avoidance of traction and utilization of the correct planes remain the basic principles for achieving optimum functional outcomes. Given that potency and continence outcomes after radical prostatectomy are multifactorial endpoints in addition to the difficulty in their postoperative assessment and the well-documented discrepancy existing in their definition, safe conclusions about the superiority of one technique over the other cannot be easily drawn. Further studies, comparing the different nerve-sparing techniques, are necessary

Different Nerve-Sparing Techniques during Radical Prostatectomy and Their Impact on Functional Outcomes

The purpose of this narrative review is to describe the different nerve-sparing techniques applied during radical prostatectomy and document their functional impact on postoperative outcomes. We performed a PubMed search of the literature using the keywords “nerve-sparing”, “techniques”, “prostatectomy” and “outcomes”. Other potentially eligible studies were retrieved using the reference list of the included studies. Nerve-sparing techniques can be distinguished based on the fascial planes of dissection (intrafascial, interfascial or extrafascial), the direction of dissection (retrograde or antegrade), the timing of the neurovascular bundle dissection off the prostate (early vs. late release), the use of cautery, the application of traction and the number of the neurovascular bundles which are preserved. Despite this rough categorisation, many techniques have been developed which cannot be integrated in one of the categories described above. Moreover, emerging technologies have entered the nerve-sparing field, making its future even more promising. Bilateral nerve-sparing of maximal extent, athermal dissection of the neurovascular bundles with avoidance of traction and utilization of the correct planes remain the basic principles for achieving optimum functional outcomes. Given that potency and continence outcomes after radical prostatectomy are multifactorial endpoints in addition to the difficulty in their postoperative assessment and the well-documented discrepancy existing in their definition, safe conclusions about the superiority of one technique over the other cannot be easily drawn. Further studies, comparing the different nerve-sparing techniques, are necessary

Non-papillary percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of staghorn stones

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the non-papillary puncture for Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for the treatment of staghorn stones in terms of safety and efficacy.METHODS: Data of 53 patients undergoing PCNL for staghorn stones were retrospectively collected from January 2015 to December 2019. A non-papillary puncture was performed with a two- step track dilation technique up to 30Fr. A 26 Fr semirigid nephroscope and an ultrasonic lithotripter with integrated suction (Swiss Lithoclast master, EMS S.A, Switzerland) were used for the treatment. Demographics and perioperative data were retrospectively gathered from an institutional board approved database.RESULTS: The average stone size was 60.1±16.1 mm. Mean operative time was 54.57±14.83 minutes, while mean time using fluoroscopy was 2.67±1.02 minutes. Mean number of accesses was 1.2 (a total of 64 accesses). Flexible nephroscope was never used. Primary stone-free rate after PCNL was 81.1% (43 patients). Mean hemoglobin drop was 1.6±1.86 gr/dl. Overall patient stay was 3.94±0.82 days, while overall complication rate was 20.7% (11 patients), with only one patient requiring blood transfusion due to pseudoaneurysm.CONCLUSIONS: The use of non-papillary access for PCNL in the treatment of staghorn stones resulted in promising results in terms of stone-free rate, operating time, complication rate, hemoglobin drop and reduced the number of percutaneous tracts. These parameters of the current investigation were directly comparable to current literature. The safety and efficacy of a non-papillary approach for the treatment of staghorn stones could be advocated