Open Access

Introduction and Objectives: Surgical techniques such as preservation of the full functional-length of the urethral sphincter (FFLU) have a positive impact on postoperative continence rates. Thereby, data on very early continence rates after radical prostatectomy (RP) are scarce. The aim of the present study was to analyze very early continence rates in patients undergoing FFLU during RP. Materials and Methods: Very early-continence was assessed by using the PAD-test within 24 h after removal of the transurethral catheter. The PAD-test is a validated test that measures the amount of involuntary urine loss while performing predefined physical activities within 1 h (e.g., coughing, walking, climbing stairs). Full continence was defined as a urine loss below 1 g. Mild, moderate, and severe incontinence was defined as urine loss of 1–10 g, 11–50 g, and >50 g, respectively. Results: 90 patients were prospectively analyzed. Removal of the catheter was performed on the 6th postoperative day. Proportions for no, mild, moderate and severe incontinence were 18.9, 45.5, 20.0, and 15.6%, respectively. In logistic regression younger age was associated with significant better continence (HR 2.52, p = 0.04), while bilateral nerve-sparing (HR 2.56, p = 0.057) and organ-confined tumor (HR 2.22, p = 0.078) showed lower urine loss, although the effect was statistically not significant. In MVA, similar results were recorded. Conclusion: Overall, 64.4% of patients were continent or suffered only from mild incontinence at 24 h after catheter removal. In general, reduced urine loss was recorded in younger patients, patients with organ-confined tumor and in patients with bilateral nerve sparing. Severe incontinence rates were remarkably low with 15.6%.

Background: Since January 2018 performance of urethroplasties is done on regular basis at the University Hospital Frankfurt (UKF). We aimed to implement and transfer an institutional standardized perioperative algorithm for urethral surgery (established at the University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf—UKE) using a validated Urethral Stricture Surgery Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (USS-PROM) in patients undergoing urethroplasty at UKF. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed all patients who underwent urethroplasty for urethral stricture disease between January 2018 and January 2020 at UKF. All patients were offered to revisit for clinical follow-up (FU) and completion of USS-PROM. Primary end point was stricture recurrence-free survival (RFS). Secondary endpoints were functional outcomes, quality of life (QoL), and patient satisfaction. Results: In total, 50 patients underwent urethroplasty and 74 and 24% had a history of previous urethrotomy or urethroplasty, respectively. A buccal mucosal graft urethroplasty was performed in 86% (n = 43). After patient's exclusion due to lost of FU, FU <3 months, and/or a pending second stage procedure, 40 patients were eligible for final analysis. At median FU of 10 months (interquartile-range 5.0–18.0), RFS was 83%. After successful voiding trial, the postoperative median Qmax significantly improved (24.0 vs. 7.0 mL/s; p < 0.01). Conversely, median residual urine decreased significantly (78 vs. 10 mL; p < 0.01). Overall, 95% of patients stated that QoL improved and 90% were satisfied by the surgical outcome. Conclusions: We demonstrated a successful implementation and transfer of an institutional standardized perioperative algorithm for urethral surgery from one location (UKE) to another (UKF). In our short-term FU, urethroplasty showed excellent RFS, low complication rates, good functional results, improvement of QoL and high patient satisfaction. PROMs allow an objective comparison between different centers.

Objectives: Bladder neck contracture (BNC) is a bothersome complication following endoscopic treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). The objective of our study was to give a more realistic insight into contemporary endoscopic BNC treatment and to evaluate and identify risk factors associated with inferior outcome. Material and Methods: We identified patients who underwent transurethral treatment for BNC secondary to previous endoscopic therapy for BPH between March 2009 and October 2016. Patients with vesico-urethral anastomotic stenosis after radical prostatectomy were excluded. Digital charts were reviewed for re-admissions and re-visits at our institutions and patients were contacted personally for follow-up. Our non-validated questionnaire assessed previous urologic therapies (including radiotherapy, endoscopic, and open surgery), time to eventual further therapy in case of BNC recurrence, and the modality of recurrence management. Results: Of 60 patients, 49 (82%) and 11 (18%) underwent transurethral bladder neck resection and incision, respectively. Initial BPH therapy was transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in 54 (90%) and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in six (10%) patients. Median time from prior therapy was 8.5 (IQR 5.3–14) months and differed significantly in those with (6.5 months; IQR 4–10) and those without BNC recurrence (10 months; IQR 6–20; p = 0.046). Thirty-three patients (55%) underwent initial endoscopic treatment, and 27 (45%) repeated endoscopic treatment for BNC. In initially-treated patients, time since BPH surgery differed significantly between those with a recurrence (median 7.5 months; IQR 6–9) compared to those treated successfully (median 12 months; IQR 9–25; p = 0.01). In patients with repeated treatment, median time from prior BNC therapy did not differ between those with (4.5 months; IQR 2–12) and those without a recurrence (6 months; IQR 6–10; p = 0.6). Overall, BNC treatment was successful in 32 patients (53%). The observed success rate of BNC treatment was significantly higher after HoLEP compared to TURP (100% vs. 48%; p = 0.026). Type of BNC treatment, number of BNC treatment, and age at surgery did not influence the outcome. Conclusions: A longer time interval between previous BPH therapy and subsequent BNC incidence seems to favorably affect treatment success of endoscopic BNC treatment, and transurethral resection and incision appear equally effective. Granted the relatively small sample size, BNC treatment success seems to be higher after HoLEP compared to TURP, which warrants validation in larger cohorts.

Purpose: Does surgical approach (minimally invasive vs. open) and type (radical vs. partial nephrectomy) affects opioid use and workplace absenteeism. Materials and Methods: Retrospective multivariable regression analysis of 2,646 opioid-naïve patients between 18 and 64 undergoing radical or partial nephrectomy via either a minimally invasive vs. open approach for kidney cancer in the United States between 2012 and 2017 drawn from the IBM Watson Health Database was performed. Outcomes included: (1) opioid use in opioid-naïve patients as measured by opioid prescriptions in the post-operative setting at early, intermediate and prolonged time periods and (2) workplace absenteeism after surgery. Results: Patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery had a lower odds of opioid use in the early and intermediate post-operative periods (early: odds ratio [OR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62–0.97; p=0.02, intermediate: OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.48–0.75; p<0.01), but not in the prolonged setting (prolonged: OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.75–1.34; p=0.98) and had earlier return to work (minimally invasive vs. open: −10.53 days; 95% CI, −17.79 to −3.26; p<0.01). Controlling for approach, patient undergoing partial nephrectomy had lower rates of opioid use across all time periods examined and returned to work earlier than patients undergoing radical nephrectomy (partial vs. radical: −14.41 days; 95% CI, −21.22 to −7.60; p<0.01). Conclusions: Patients undergoing various forms of surgery for kidney cancer had lower rates of peri-operative opioid use, fewer days of workplace absenteeism, but no difference in long-term rates of opioid use in patients undergoing minimally invasive as compared to open surgery.

Objective: Many patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa) do not immediately undergo radical prostatectomy (RP) after biopsy confirmation. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of “time-from-biopsy-to- prostatectomy” on adverse pathological outcomes. Materials and Methods: Between January 2014 and December 2019, 437 patients with intermediate- and high risk PCa who underwent RP were retrospectively identified within our prospective institutional database. For the aim of our study, we focused on patients with intermediate- (n = 285) and high-risk (n = 151) PCa using D'Amico risk stratification. Endpoints were adverse pathological outcomes and proportion of nerve-sparing procedures after RP stratified by “time-from-biopsy-to-prostatectomy”: ≤3 months vs. >3 and < 6 months. Medians and interquartile ranges (IQR) were reported for continuously coded variables. The chi-square test examined the statistical significance of the differences in proportions while the Kruskal-Wallis test was used to examine differences in medians. Multivariable (ordered) logistic regressions, analyzing the impact of time between diagnosis and prostatectomy, were separately run for all relevant outcome variables (ISUP specimen, margin status, pathological stage, pathological nodal status, LVI, perineural invasion, nerve-sparing). Results: We observed no difference between patients undergoing RP ≤3 months vs. >3 and <6 months after diagnosis for the following oncological endpoints: pT-stage, ISUP grading, probability of a positive surgical margin, probability of lymph node invasion (LNI), lymphovascular invasion (LVI), and perineural invasion (pn) in patients with intermediate- and high-risk PCa. Likewise, the rates of nerve sparing procedures were 84.3 vs. 87.4% (p = 0.778) and 61.0% vs. 78.8% (p = 0.211), for intermediate- and high-risk PCa patients undergoing surgery after ≤3 months vs. >3 and <6 months, respectively. In multivariable adjusted analyses, a time to surgery >3 months did not significantly worsen any of the outcome variables in patients with intermediate- or high-risk PCa (all p > 0.05). Conclusion: A “time-from-biopsy-to-prostatectomy” of >3 and <6 months is neither associated with adverse pathological outcomes nor poorer chances of nerve sparing RP in intermediate- and high-risk PCa patients.