COVID-19 and urology: a comprehensive review of the literature

Participation in Virtual Urology Conferences During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-sectional Survey Study

Background

Due to the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic, conventional face-to-face academic conferences have been restricted, and many of these conferences have moved onto the internet.

Objective

The aim of this study was to investigate the virtual conferences in the field of urology during the COVID-19 pandemic and provide suggestions for better organization of such conferences.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was conducted from May 30 to June 15, 2020, in China. Our team designed a 23-item questionnaire to investigate the conferences attended by urologists during the COVID-19 pandemic. SPSS 22.0 (IBM Corporation) was applied to analyze the data collected.

Results

A total of 330 Chinese urologists participated in our survey, and the response rate was 89.7% (330/368). Among the participants, 40.9% (135/330) were associate chief physicians. The proportion of participants who took part in conventional face-to-face academic conferences decreased from 92.7% (306/330) before the COVID-19 pandemic to 22.1% (73/330) during the pandemic (P<.001). In contrast, the proportion of urologists who took part in virtual conferences increased from 69.4% (229/330) to 90% (297/330) (P<.001). Most urologists (70.7%, 210/297) chose to participate in the virtual conferences at home and thought that a meeting length of 1-2 hours was most appropriate. Among the urologists, 73.7% (219/297) reported that their participation in the virtual conferences went smoothly, while the remaining respondents reported that they had experienced lags in video and audio streaming during the virtual conferences. When comparing conventional face-to-face conferences with virtual conferences, 70.7% (210/297) of the respondents thought that both conference formats were acceptable, while 17.9% (53/297) preferred virtual conferences and 11.5% (34/297) preferred conventional face-to-face meetings.

Conclusions

Virtual conferences are increasing in popularity during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, many aspects of these conferences could be improved for better organization.

Low Rates of Urologic Side Effects Following Coronavirus Disease Vaccination: An Analysis of the Food and Drug Administration Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System

OBJECTIVE

To quantify and describe urologic adverse events and symptoms after vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We queried the FDA Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) for all reported symptoms following the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines as of February 12th, 2021. All urologic symptoms were isolated and the reported adverse events associated with each symptom were reviewed.

RESULTS

Out of 15,785 adverse event reports, only 0.7% (113) described urologic symptoms. A total of 156 urologic symptoms were described amongst the 113 adverse event reports. The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was responsible for 61% of these reports and the Moderna vaccine was responsible for 39%. These symptoms were grouped into five different categories: Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (n = 34, 22%), Hematuria (n = 22, 14%), Urinary Infection (n = 41, 26%), Skin and/or Soft Tissue (n = 16, 10%), and Other (n = 43, 28%). The median age of the patients reporting urologic symptoms was 63 years (IQR 44-79, Range: 19-96) and 54% of the patients were female.

CONCLUSION

Urologic symptoms reported after COVID-19 vaccination are extremely rare. Given the common prevalence of many of these reported symptoms in the general population, there does not appear to be a correlation between vaccination and urologic symptoms, but as the vaccination criteria expands, further monitoring of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System is needed.

Applicability of COVID-19 Pandemic Recommendations for Urology Practice: Data from Three Major Italian Hot Spots (BreBeMi)

BACKGROUND

Lombardy has been the first and one of the most affected European regions during the first and second waves of the novel coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2]).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on all urologic activities over a 17-wk period in the three largest public hospitals in Lombardy located in the worst hit area in Italy, and to assess the applicability of the authorities' recommendations provided for reorganising urology practice.

DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective analysis of all urologic activities performed at three major public hospitals in Lombardy (Brescia, Bergamo, and Milan), from January 1 to April 28, 2020, was performed.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Join-point regression was used to identify significant changes in trends for all urologic activities. Average weekly percentage changes (AWPCs) were estimated to summarise linear trends. Uro-oncologic surgeries performed during the pandemic were tabulated and stratified according to the first preliminary recommendations by Stensland et al (Stensland KD, Morgan TM, Moinzadeh A, et al. Considerations in the triage of urologic surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic. Eur Urol 2020;77:663-6) and according to the level of priority recommended by European Association of Urology guidelines.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The trend for 2020 urologic activities decreased constantly from weeks 8-9 up to weeks 11-13 (AWPC range -41%, -29.9%; p < 0.001). One-third of uro-oncologic surgeries performed were treatments that could have been postponed, according to the preliminary urologic recommendations. High applicability to recommendations was observed for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) patients with intermediate/emergency level of priority, penile and testicular cancer patients, and upper tract urothelial cell carcinoma (UTUC) and renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients with intermediate level of priority. Low applicability was observed for NMIBC patients with low/high level of priority, UTUC patients with high level of priority, prostate cancer patients with intermediate/high level of priority, and RCC patients with low level of priority.

CONCLUSIONS

During COVID-19, we found a reduction in all urologic activities. High-priority surgeries and timing of treatment recommended by the authorities require adaptation according to hospital resources and local incidence.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We assessed the urologic surgeries that were privileged during the first wave of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the three largest public hospitals in Lombardy, worst hit by the pandemic, to evaluate whether high-priority surgeries and timing of treatment recommended by the authorities are applicable. Pandemic recommendations provided by experts should be tailored according to hospital capacity and different levels of the pandemic.

Impact of COVID-19 outbreak on urology surgical waiting lists and waiting lists prioritization strategies in the post-COVID-19 era

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

[Impact of COVID-19 outbreak on urology surgical waiting lists and waiting lists prioritization strategies in the Post-COVID-19 era]

Introduction

The suspension of most elective surgeries during COVID-19 pandemic caused the lengthening of urology surgical waiting lists. The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on urology surgical waiting list in a high-volume hospital.

Methods

An observational descriptive study was designed. All patients included in the urology surgical waiting list of our high-volume center on May 1st 2020 (46 days after the suspension of elective surgery) were analyzed. Baseline variables, priority on the waiting list, main urological disease, type of scheduled surgery, and waiting time were recorded. Other variables recorded were the presence of a urinary catheter, number of accesses to the emergency department, evidence of COVID-19 infection, number of deaths and their cause. The waiting time for each disease was compared with the time to surgery in 2019.

Results

A total of 350 patients were included. The mean (SD) time on the waiting list was 97.33 (55.47) days. Priority 1 patients, who normally should undergo surgery within 30 days, were on the waiting list for a mean (SD) time of 60.51 (20.14) days. They were mainly patients with ureteral lithiasis (25.6%), high-risk or muscle-invasive bladder cancer (20.9%) and high-risk prostate cancer (13.9%). The mean waiting time had already significantly exceeded the mean time to surgery in 2019 for radical cystectomy (p = 0.04) and URS (p = 0.003).

Conclusions

The suspension of most elective surgeries due to COVID-19 had a significant impact on urology surgical waiting list of our high-volume center, especially in priority 1 group.

Nation-wide analysis of the impact of Covid-19 pandemic on daily urology practice in Turkey

OBJECTIVE

To present a nation-wide analysis of the workload of urology departments in Turkey week-by-week during Covid-19 pandemic.

METHODOLOGY

The centres participating in the study were divided into three groups as tertiary referral centres, state hospitals and private practice hospitals. The number of outpatients, inpatients, daily interventions and urological surgeries were recorded prospectively between 9-March-2020 and 31-May-2020. All these variables were recorded for the same time interval of 2019 as well. The weekly change of the workload of urology during pandemic period was evaluated, also the workload of urology and the distributions of certain urological surgeries were compared between the pandemic period and the same time interval of the year 2019.

RESULTS

A total of 51 centres participated in the study. The number of outpatients, inpatients, urological surgeries and daily interventions were found to be dramatically decreased by the 3rd week of pandemics in state hospitals and tertiary referral centres; however, the daily urological practice were similar in private practice hospitals throughout the pandemic period. When the workload of urology in pandemic period and the same time interval of the year 2019 were compared, a huge decrease was observed in all variables during pandemic period. However, temporary measures like ureteral stenting, nephrostomy placement and percutaneous cystostomy have been found to increase during Covid-19 pandemic compared with normal life.

CONCLUSIONS

Covid-19 pandemic significantly affected the routine daily urological practice likewise other subspecialties and priority was given to emergent and non-deferrable surgeries by urologists in concordance with published clinical guidelines.

The Impact of COVID-19 Disease on Urology Practice

The diagnosis and timely treatment of cancer patients should not be compromised during an infectious disease pandemic. The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has serious implications on urology practice and raises particular questions for urologists about the management of different conditions. It was recommended to cancel most of the elective urological surgeries. Urological cancers surgeries that should be prioritized are radical cystectomy for selective tumors, orchiectomy for suspected testicular tumors, nephrectomy for c T3 + , nephroureterectomy for high-grade disease, and radical adrenalectomy for tumors >6 cm or adrenal carcinoma. Most prostatectomies can be delayed without compromising the survival rate of patients. Urological emergencies should be treated adequately even during this pandemic. There is a potential risk of coronavirus diffusion during minimally invasive procedures performed. It is crucial to use specific precautions when urologists performed those type of surgeries. It was also recommended to suspend the kidney transplantation program during the COVID-19 pandemic except for specific cases. In this review, we discussed the triage of urological surgeries, the risk of minimally invasive urological procedure, the kidney transplantation challenges, the systemic therapies, intravesical instillation of Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG), endourology, teleconferencing, and telemedicine application in urology during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Workforce Issues in Urology

The future supply of urologists is not on pace to account for future demands of urologic care. This impending urologic shortage sits on a backdrop of multiple other workforce issues. In this review, we take an in-depth look at several pressing issues facing the urologic workforce, including the impending urology shortage, gender and diversity concerns, growing levels of burnout, and the effects of the coronavirus pandemic. In doing so, we highlight specific areas of clinical practice that may need to be addressed from a health care policy standpoint.

Acute complex appendicitis during the COVID-19 epidemic: A single-institution retrospective analysis based on real-world data

Objectives

To investigate the influence of Coronavirus Disease 2019 on incidence of acute complex appendicitis and management of acute appendicitis.

Methods

Patients undergoing acute appendicitis surgery in a single center during the COVID-19 epidemic from January to September 2020 and patients from January to September 2019 were taken as the epidemic group and control group respectively. The clinical characteristics and surgical pathological information were compared between the two groups. The primary outcome measure was complex appendicitis.

Results

A total of 235 patients were included in the study, containing 106 in the epidemic group and 129 in the control group. The patients in the epidemic group had a significantly longer interval from the onset of symptoms to registration (37.92 h vs 24.57 h, P = 0.028), from registration to admission (18.69 h vs 8.04 h, P < 0.001), and from admission to surgery (7.23 h vs 6.52 h, P = 0.016). The epidemic group had a higher incidence of suppurative appendicitis (86.8% vs 76.0%, P = 0.036) and a higher incidence of complex appendicitis (35.8% vs 19.4%, P = 0.005).

Conclusion

Higher incidence of acute complex appendicitis seemed to occur during COVID-19 outbreak.

Methodology for triage of urologic surgical cases in the setting of a pandemic

Background

The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020 forced our healthcare system in the Bronx, New York to cancel nearly all scheduled surgeries. We developed a framework for prioritizing postponed urologic surgeries that was utilized once cases were permitted to be rescheduled. As many parts of our country experience first and second waves of this pandemic, our framework may serve as a resource for other centers experiencing restrictions on the scheduling of elective urologic surgeries.

Methods

As the COVID-19 pandemic started and peaked in New York, almost all of our scheduled urologic surgeries were cancelled. Each Urologist was asked to rank his/her cancelled surgeries by priority (Level 1—least urgent; Level 2—moderately urgent; Level 3—most urgent). A committee of Urologists assigned a subclass to Level 3 and 2 cases (3a—least urgent; 3b—moderately urgent; 3c—most urgent; 2a—lower priority; 2b—higher priority). The committee then reviewed cases by urgency to derive a final priority ranking.

Results

A total of 478 total urologic surgeries were canceled and categorized: 250 Level 1, 130 Level 2, 98 Level 3 (73 adult, 25 pediatric). Level 3c involved renal cell carcinoma ≥ T2b, high-grade bladder urothelial carcinoma, adrenal mass/cancer > 6 cm, testicular cancer requiring radical orchiectomy, and penile cancer. Level 3b involved T2a renal masses requiring nephrectomy, while high-risk prostate cancer and symptomatic nephrolithiasis were classified as 3a. Level 2 included testicular cancer requiring retroperitoneal lymph node dissection and complicated benign prostatic hyperplasia. Surgeries for urologic reconstruction, non-complicated nephrolithiasis, erectile dysfunction, and urinary incontinence were considered Level 1.

Conclusions

Our disease-specific approach to surgical rescheduling offers appropriate guidance for triaging urologic surgeries. Our system can provide guidance to other institutions as COVID-19 cases surge in different regions and with the growing second wave.

Effect of COVID-19 Pandemic on Diagnosis and Treatment Delays in Urological Disease: Single-Institution Experience

Purpose

In the background of the global pandemic, we aim to investigate the effect of COVID-19 on diagnosis and treatment delay in urology patients.

Patients and Methods

A total of 4919 inpatients were identified from the urological department in our institution, including 2947 and 1972 patients within 9 months before and after the outbreak (group A and group B). The baseline characteristics and residential population of different types of diseases were compared in the two groups. Patients who underwent delay of diagnosis or treatment with poor outcomes were described.

Results

Our result revealed a 33.1% decrease of total resident population as well as a 44.8% decline in bed utilization rate after the outbreak. Significant differences were found between group A and group B in gender (P=0.024) and patients living alone or not (P=0.026). The hospitalization rate of patients with malignancy increased significantly while that of benign patients decreased during the epidemic (P<0.001). Besides, we identified 5 cases with bladder cancer and 3 cases with prostate cancer that underwent delay of diagnosis or treatment with unfavorable consequences.

Conclusion

With the impact of COVID-19, delay in diagnosis or treatment of non-COVID-19 diseases is inevitable whether the medical resources allocation is effective or not. Psychological status of patients might be the major cause of postponing diagnosis or treatment. For urological patients with locally advanced tumor or rapid progression, who need long-term postoperative intervention, the delay of regular treatment could lead to inevitable progression or recurrence.

[COVID-19 in european urology : Which lessons have we learned?]

The coronavirus has challenged all medical systems worldwide. Herein both waves of COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) in spring and autumn 2020 differ principally. Whereas Europe was hit by the first wave more or less unprepared, which was aggravated by the high virulence of COVID-19, the second wave is characterized by a much higher contagiosity of the virus with very high incidences. On the other hand the virus has attenuated, which is reflected by the significantly lower incidence-related mortality rate. However, the overall increasing number of infected patients represents again a great challenge for the medical management of the disease. France and Spain are doing better in comparison to Germany and Italy this time. The absolute number of deaths per week is higher than during the peak of the first wave. However, urologists in these countries have also experienced greater restrictions in their activities in the second shutdown than in Germany, where there is only a reduction of beds to between 75 and 90%. Mostly all levels are operated. Of importance for Germany, however, is the plateau on a high level for several weeks probably due to the reduced efficacy of a light lock-down. This finally resulted in a total lock-down in mid-December 2020. Subsequently in Germany some hospitals are also reaching their limits with similar consequences for the departments of urology facing a 50% reduction of beds and operating only level III and IV indications. Nevertheless, the management of urologic patients during the COVID-19 pandemic is carried out in Europa on a high standard. Therefor the risk of secondary harm to our patients is expected to be rather minimal in the long run.

The impact of COVID-19 in medical practice. A review focused on Urology

COVID-19 pandemic is a rapidly spreading virus that is changing the World and the way doctors are practicing medicine. The huge number of patients searching for medical care and needing intensive care beds led the health care system to a burnout status especially in places where the care system was already overloaded. In this setting, and also due to the absence of a specific treatment for the disease, health authorities had to opt for recommending or imposing social distancing to relieve the health system and reduce deaths. All other medical specialties non-directly related to the treatment of COVID-19 had to interrupt or strongly reduce their activities in order to give room to seriously ill patients, since no one knows so far the real extent of the virus damage on human body and the consequences of doing non deferrable procedures in this pandemic era. Despite not been a urological disease, the urologist needs to be updated on how to deal with these patients and how to take care of himself and of the medical team he works with. The aim of this article is to review briefly some practical aspects of COVID-19 and its implications in the urological practice in our country.

Thoracic surgery and COVID-19: changes and managements during the pandemic

Background

Several articles have been published about the reorganization of surgical activity during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic but little is known about the operative volume, distribution of cases, or capacity of The Department of Thoracic Surgery to deliver surgical services in the time of COVID-19.

Methods

A retrospective operative logbook review was completed in department of thoracic in a designated COVID-19 hospital. We reviewed and analyzed the operative logbook and discussed our countermeasures during the outbreak. A prediction model was established to discuss the time consuming about delayed surgeries during the pandemic.

Results

One thousand two hundred and seventy-five operation records were collected. The thoracic surgeries of this year has decreased (43.4%) during the Wuhan lockdown. From Jan 23^rd to Apr 8^th in 2020, there were 461 surgeries performed in The Department of Thoracic in our hospital with 0 cases of nosocomial COVID-19 infection. Prediction model showed that it will take 6 weeks to solve the backlog if department can reach the 85% of maximum of operations per week.

Conclusions

An understanding of operative case volume and distribution is essential in facilitating targeted interventions to strengthen surgical capacity in the time of COVID-19. A proper guideline is imperative to ensure access to safe, timely surgical care. By developing a scientific and effective management of hospital, it is possible to ensure optimal surgical safety during this crisis. Regular updates and a further study include multicenter is required.

Clinical trial registry number

ChiCTR2000034346.

Impact of the COVID-19 Crisis on Same-day Discharge After Robotic Urologic Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the rate of same-day discharge (SDD) after robotic surgery METHODS: We reviewed our robotic surgeries during COVID-19 restrictions on surgery in Ohio between March 17 and June 5, 2020 and compared them with robotic procedures before COVID-19 and after restrictions were lifted. We followed our formerly described protocol in use since 2016 offering the option of SDD to all robotic urologic surgery patients, regardless of procedure type or patient-specific factors.

RESULTS

During COVID-19 restrictions (COV), 89 robotic surgeries were performed and compared with 1667 of the same procedures performed previously (pre-COV) and 42 during the following month (post-COV). Among COV patients 98% (87/89 patients) opted for same-day discharge after surgery versus 52% in the historical pre-COV group (P < .00001). Post-COV, the higher rate of SDD was maintained at 98% (41/42 patients). There were no differences in 30-day complications or readmissions between SDD and overnight patients with only 2 COV (2%) and no post-COV 30-day readmissions.

CONCLUSION

SDD after robotic surgery was safely applied during the COVID-19 crisis without increasing complications or readmissions. SDD may allow continuation of robotic surgery despite limited hospital beds and when minimizing hospital stay is important to protect postoperative patients from infection. Our experience suggests that patient attitude is a major factor in SDD after robotic surgery since the proportion of patients opting for SDD was much higher during COV and continued post-COV. Consideration of SDD long-term may be warranted for cost savings even in the absence of a crisis.

Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 in Human Semen and Effect on Total Sperm Number: A Prospective Observational Study

PURPOSE

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has created a surge of research to help better understand the breadth of possible sequelae. However, little is known regarding the impact on semen parameters and fertility potential. We sought to investigate for presence of viral RNA in semen of men with SARS-CoV-2 infection and to evaluate its effect on semen parameters in ejaculate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We prospectively recruited thirty men diagnosed with acute SARS-CoV-2 infection using real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) of pharyngeal swab specimens. Semen samples were collected from each individual using mailed kits. Follow-up semen samples were done with mailed kits or in-person in office setting. Semen analysis and PCR was performed after samples were received.

RESULTS

Thirty semen samples from recovered men were obtained 11-64 days after testing positive for SAR-CoV-2 infection. The median duration between positive SAR-CoV-2 test and semen collection was 37 days (interquartile range [IQR]=23). The median total sperm number (TSN) in ejaculate was 12.5 million (IQR=52.1). When compared with age-matched SARS-CoV-2(-) men, TSN was lower among SARS-CoV-2(+) men (p=0.0024). Five men completed a follow-up sperm analysis (median 3 months) and had a median TSN of 18 million (IQR=21.6). No RNA was detected by means of RT-PCR in the semen in 16 samples tested.

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 infection, though not detected in semen of recovered men, can affect TSN in ejaculate in the acute setting. Whether SARS-CoV-2 can affect spermatogenic function long-term remains to be evaluated.

Telemedicine for Musculoskeletal Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evaluating Readiness of Saudi Citizens

INTRODUCTION

Since coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was announced as a global pandemic, it has become important to control the pandemic with several approaches, including limiting hospital visits. Telemedicine is a good option to help reduce in-person visits during the pandemic. Saudi Arabia has prepared for this pandemic by implementing applications, such as Tetamman and Seha. In this study, we aimed to determine the readiness of the Saudi population to use telemedicine for musculoskeletal care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted from July 2020 to October 2020. The study used a predesigned, self-administered questionnaire with acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's α=0.79). A questionnaire with 30 questions was distributed electronically and randomly to the Saudi population. The included participants were Arabic speakers, Saudis, and men or women age 18 years or older.

RESULTS

A total of 635 respondents, of which 250 were men (39.4%) and 385 were women (60.6%), completed the questionnaire. The most common region of residence was the Central region (41.6%), followed by the Eastern region (28%). The proportions of patients who had knowledge about virtual clinics and who used a virtual clinic during the COVID-19 pandemic were 47.6% and 30.4%, respectively. The mean overall attitude score was 24.4 (standard deviation, 9.9) of 35 points; negative, neutral, and positive attitudes were reported among 9.9%, 54.3%, and 35.7% of respondents, respectively. Compared with the older population, younger-aged participants (≤25 years) had significantly more positive attitudes about virtual clinics (χ2=6.068; p=0.048). Those respondents who had never been married showed significantly more positive attitudes about virtual clinics compared with those who had been married (χ2=6.695; p=0.035).

CONCLUSIONS

The studied Saudi population shows a moderate level of acceptance of the concept of using telemedicine in musculoskeletal conditions, but some issues about patient access and understanding of the technology remain unaddressed.

Diagnostic bias during the COVID-19 era: COVID-19 or renal abscess?

Introduction:

The Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) has been declared as a pandemic in March 2020 by the World Health Organization (WHO). Since then, this pandemic has dramatically affected the entire world, even radically influencing the way patients are framed at triage. Symptoms and tests in most cases lead to a correct diagnosis; however, error may be around the corner.

Case report:

A 60 years old patient was referred with weight loss, fatigue and mild fever for 3 weeks as he was working in a COVID-19 ward. After a positive swab and chest CT scan, he was admitted in the hospital and treated as mild COVID-19 patient. A CT scan performed after the patient was discharged revealed a renal lesion misidentified as a tumor then clarified to be an abscess which retrospectively appears to be the main cause of his symptoms.

Conclusion:

Clinicians should consider other life-threatening disease in the differential diagnosis of patients presenting with similar symptoms to minimize mistakes and avoid further unnecessary investigations.

Feasibility of a telementoring approach as a practical training for transurethral enucleation of the benign prostatic hyperplasia using bipolar energy: a pilot study

Introduction

Telementoring is one of the applications of telemedicine capable of bringing highly experienced surgeons to areas lacking expertise. In the current study, we aimed to assess a novel telementoring application during the learning curve of transurethral enucleation of the prostate using bipolar energy (TUEB).

Material and methods

A telementoring system was developed by our engineering department. This application was used to mentor ten prospective cases of TUEB performed by an expert endourologist (novice to the TUEB). A questionnaire was filled by the operating surgeon and the mentor to provide subjective evaluation of the telementoring system. Finally, the outcomes of these patients were compared to a control group consisting of ten consecutive patients performed by the mentor.

Results

Ten consecutive TUEB were performed using this telementoring application. Delayed and interrupted connection were experienced in two and one patients, respectively; however, their effect was minor, and they did not compromise the safety of the procedure. None of the patients required conversion to conventional transurethral resection of the prostate. Only one patient in our series experienced grade IIIb complication.

Conclusion

The telementoring application for TUEB is promising. It is a simple and low-cost tool that could be a feasible option to ensure patients’ safety during the initial phase of the learning curve without time and locations constraints for both the mentor and the trainee; However, it should be mentioned that telementoring cannot yet replace the traditional surgical training with the mentor and trainee being in the operative room. Further studies are required to confirm the current results

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00345-021-03594-9.

[COVID-19 in urology : Influence of the pandemic on telemedicine, education and surgery]

Die COVID-19-Pandemie („coronavirus disease 2019“) hat weltweit zu wirtschaftlichen und klinischen Katastrophen geführt. In den Hochphasen mit hohen Infektionsraten verlagerte sich der klinische Alltag in den Notfallbereich und betrifft alle Fachbereiche und somit auch die Urologie. Es ist ein schmaler Grat zwischen Verschiebung einer Operation, um das Risiko einer möglichen Infektion der Patienten zu minimieren und gleichzeitig das Ergebnis der Behandlung nicht negativ zu beeinflussen. Im ambulanten Sektor konnte durch die forcierte Integration der Telemedizin die Routine kompensiert werden. Auch die Ausbildung der Urologieanwärter kann bis zu einem gewissen Punkt durch die Telemedizin aufrechterhalten werden, die operative Ausbildung fällt zunächst allerdings zurück. Das tatsächliche Ausmaß der Pandemie in der Urologie bleibt noch abzuwarten und kann erst nach Stabilisierung der Infektionswellen mit den zu erwarteten Impfstoffen erfasst werden.

Evaluation of urticaria patients before and during the period of the COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective study

The COVID‐19 pandemic is the most serious health crisis facing the modern world; hospital admissions have risen dramatically. Urticaria is characterized by itchy edematous papules/plaques, angioedema, and involvement of one or both of the deep dermis or subcutis. We investigated the effect of the COVID‐19 pandemic on the incidence of acute and chronic urticaria, the proportions of urticaria patients among all dermatology patients before and after the onset of the pandemic, and age and sex characteristics. About 57 patients diagnosed with urticaria before the onset of the COVID‐19 pandemic in December 2019 and January and February 2020 at the Dermatology Polyclinic of Beysehir State Hospital, and 25 patients diagnosed within 3 months (March‐May 2020) after the onset of the pandemic, were included. We retrospectively recorded age, sex, and the duration of the disease. Patients were divided into those with acute and chronic urticaria using the EAACI/GA(2)/LEN/EDF/WAO guidelines and data obtained before and after the onset of the pandemic were compared. Fifty‐one (62.2%) patients were female and the mean patient age was 40.88 ± 17.38 years. We found no significant difference in the mean age or sex distribution before and after the onset of the pandemic (P = .341; P = .604). The proportion of urticaria patients (1.6%) among all dermatology patients treated in a 3‐month period after the onset of the pandemic was higher than that before the pandemic (1.19%; P < .001). During the pandemic, the acute urticaria rate was significantly higher than before the pandemic (P = .002). The urticaria rate (particularly that of acute disease) increased during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Dermatologists should consider whether patients with urticaria might be infected with COVID‐19.

Optimize the management of urological tube-related emergencies during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic

Background

To introduce and determine the value of optimized strategies for the management of urological tube-related emergencies with increased incidence, complexity and operational risk during the global spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Methods

All emergent urological patients at Tongji Hospital, Wuhan, during the period of January 23 (the beginning of lockdown in Wuhan) to March 23, 2020, and the corresponding period in 2019 were recruited to form this study’s COVID-19 group and control group, respectively. Tongji Hospital has the most concentrated and strongest Chinese medical teams to treat the largest number of severe COVID-19 patients. Patients in the control group were routinely treated, while patients in the COVID-19 group were managed following the optimized principles and strategies. The case incidence for each type of tube-related emergency was recorded. Baseline characteristics and management outcomes (surgery time, secondary complex operation rate, readmission rate, COVID-19 infection rate) were analyzed and compared across the control and COVID-19 periods.

Results

The total emergent urological patients during the COVID-19 period was 42, whereas during the control period, it was 124. The incidence of tube-related emergencies increased from 53% to 88% (P<0.001) during the COVID-19 period. In particular, the incidence of nephrostomy tube-related (31% vs. 15%, P=0.027) and single-J stent-related problems (19% vs. 6%, P=0.009) increased significantly. The mean surgery times across the two periods were comparable. The number of secondary complex operations increased from 12 (18%) to 14 (38%) (P=0.028) during the COVID 19-period. The number of 2-week postoperative readmission decreased from 10 (15%) to 1 (3%) (P=0.049). No participants contracted during the COVID-19 period.

Conclusions

Urological tube-related emergencies have been found to have a higher incidence and require more complicated and dangerous operations during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the optimized management strategies introduced in this study are efficient, and safe for both urologists and patients.

The urological practice and contribution to the general health system of the EBU accredited urology clinic during the first month of COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis from a tertiary center declared as a national COVID-19 pandemic hospital in Turkey

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the overall healthcare performance of our re-organized urology clinic during the COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective review of our department data was conducted between March 20, 2020, and April 16, 2020. All consecutive patients who received healthcare in both urology and emergency COVID-19 clinics by urologists during this period were included. We classified our healthcare into 4 categories: 1) Standard urological outpatient clinic procedures, 2) Urological emergency procedures, 3) Standard inpatient treatment clinic procedures and specific inpatient treatment clinic procedures for COVID-19 suspected cases, and 4) Specific emergency clinic procedures for COVID-19. Epidemiologic data and patient characteristics were analyzed using independent t test and chi-square test.

RESULTS

Overall, the data of 990 patients were evaluated. Of these patients, 344 were seen in standard urology outpatient clinic and 212 were transferred from COVID-19 emergency clinic and hospitalized because of suspected COVID-19 infection. In the COVID-19 emergency clinic, 361 patients were seen by urologists in different shifts. Our workload was on behalf of COVID-19 cases. In our COVID-19 experience, there were no statistically significant differences between our suspected and confirmed COVID-19 patients in terms of mean age, sex and age periods (p=0.30, p=0.77, and p=0.78, respectively).

CONCLUSION

We successfully contributed to the national COVID-19 management program. In our opinion, each department should create a customized action plan instead of a standardized approach during the COVID-19 pandemic or potential public emergencies in the future.

Urology during COVID-19 Pandemic Crisis: A Systematic Review

Background  Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has evolved as a pandemic of unimaginable magnitude. The health care system is facing a tremendous challenge to provide ethical and quality care. The transformation of the patient-based care to population-based care during the COVID-19 pandemic has raised ethical dilemma among urologists. Our objective is to explore the consensus in modified standard urology care, that can be adopted and applied during COVID-19 and similar pandemic. Methods  We adopted an exploratory study design using secondary data. The data were extracted from a web-based medical library using keywords "COVID-19," "severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)," and "urology." We identify and extrapolate (screening, eligibility, and inclusion) the data using PRISMA protocol, and summarize pandemic standard urology care under four main themes: (1) general urology care, (2) choice of surgical modality, (3) triage, and (4) urology training. Result  We identified 63 academic papers related to our research question. The majority are expert opinions and perspectives on urology care. The common consensus is triage-based urology care and surgeries. Life or organ threatening conditions need immediate attention. Universal protective measures (personal protective equipment, safe operative environment) and protocol-based patient care are necessary to prevent and control SARS-CoV-2 infection. Conservation of the resources and its rational distribution provide an ethical basis for population-based health care during a pandemic. Informed decision making serves best to patients, families, and society during the public health crisis. Conclusion  COVID-19 pandemic tends to transform standard urology practice into crisis standard population-based care. The consensus in crisis is drawn from evolving pieces of medical evidence and public health ethics. The provision of urology care during a pandemic is based on the availability of resources; severity of the disease, consequences of deferment of service, and dynamics of the pandemic.

Urological activity at the time of COVID-19 pandemic: is there any difference between public and private field?

Introduction

as COVID-19 pandemic is rapidly evolving, there is a whole reorganization in hospitals to concentrate more resources to face the crisis. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 disease on urological activity in Tunisia. To assess the differences in the management of urological conditions between the private and the public field.

Methods

a survey was addressed to all certified urologists working in Tunisia in both the public and private sectors (n=194) using the national database of active urologists available and updated. We either called them or looked them up through email or social media. The form was open from March the 28^th to April the 3^rd. Results were obtained via spreadsheet and analysed using SPSS 23.0.

Results

one hundred and twenty urologists have filled in the form. Consultations at the outpatient office were restricted to urgent cases in 66% (n=79). Telemedicine was more used by urologists in private than in public fields p=0.03. Urologists in private sector followed more the sterilization protocol of the hospital/clinic and used more disposable materials whenever possible p=0.011. Elective surgical activity has completely stopped in 85% of the responders (n=102). Elective surgery requiring transfusion or intensive care unit was performed in 38% (n=46) and 26% (n=31) if there was a risk of disease progression. Benign Prostate Hyperplasia (BPH) surgery was more performed as usual in private sector than in public sector p=0.012. It was the only condition managed differently between both sectors.

Conclusion

the drop of the urological activity is essential in order to give relevant stakeholders room to act efficiently against the spread of the virus. The context of the pandemic and the hospital´s condition must be taken into consideration without compromising the patient´s outcome.

Robots Under COVID-19 Pandemic: A Comprehensive Survey

As a result of the difficulties brought by COVID-19 and its associated lockdowns, many individuals and companies have turned to robots in order to overcome the challenges of the pandemic. Compared with traditional human labor, robotic and autonomous systems have advantages such as an intrinsic immunity to the virus and an inability for human-robot-human spread of any disease-causing pathogens, though there are still many technical hurdles for the robotics industry to overcome. This survey comprehensively reviews over 200 reports covering robotic systems which have emerged or have been repurposed during the past several months, to provide insights to both academia and industry. In each chapter, we cover both the advantages and the challenges for each robot, finding that robotics systems are overall apt solutions for dealing with many of the problems brought on by COVID-19, including: diagnosis, screening, disinfection, surgery, telehealth, care, logistics, manufacturing and broader interpersonal problems unique to the lockdowns of the pandemic. By discussing the potential new robot capabilities and fields they applied to, we expect the robotics industry to take a leap forward due to this unexpected pandemic.

Overview of the italian experience in surgical management of bladder cancer during first month of COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

Overview of bladder cancer (BC) management in Italy during the first month of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020) with head to head comparison of the data from March 2019, considered "usual activity" period. The aim is to analyze performance of different Italian Centers in North, Center and South, with a special eye for Lombardy (the Italian epicenter).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

During April 2020, a survey containing 14 multiple-choice questions focused on general staffing and surgical activity related to BC during the months of March 2019 and March 2020 was sent to 32 Italian Centers. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics (v26) software. A Medline search was performed, in order to attempt a comparative analysis with published papers.

RESULTS

28 Centers answered, for a response rate of 87.5%. Most of the urology staff in the Lombardy region were employed in COVID wards (p = 0.003), with a statistically significant reduction in the number of radical cystectomies (RC) performed during that time (p = 0.036). The total amount of RC across Italy remained the same between 2019 and 2020, however there was an increase in the number of surgeries performed in the Southern region. This was most likely due to travel restrictions limiting travel the North. The number of Trans-Urethral Resection of Bladder Tumors (TURBT) (p = 0.046) was higher in Academic Centers (AC) in 2020 (p = 0.037).

CONCLUSIONS

The data of our survey, although limited, represents a snap shot of the management of BC during the first month of the COVD-19 pandemic, which posed a major challenge for cancer centers seeking to provide care during an extremely dynamic clinical and political situation which requires maximum flexibility to be appropriately managed.

Could Interventional Radiological Therapies Offer a Safer Alternative as We Emerge from COVID-19 Pandemic?

The ongoing SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic poses a major risk to health care delivery all around the world and also poses significant risks to the public and health care workers (HCWs). Surgical procedures, particularly elective procedures, have been cancelled or deferred due to increased risks associated with surgery and anesthesia both to the patient and the HCWs as well as to allocate resources to treat infected patients. This is particularly true for patients with comorbidities and cancer. As countries emerge from this pandemic, a phased return to conventional surgical procedures is being proposed, with emphasis on procedures performed in ambulatory settings and avoiding endotracheal intubation, where possible. Interventional radiological (IR) procedures offer a unique advantage in this setting, as these procedures are often performed with local or regional anesthesia with shorter hospital stay. In this brief communication, we outline the current opinion on surgical risks and guidelines and suggest areas where interventional therapies may offer an advantage to the multidisciplinary team and patient.

Surgical Delay and Pathological Outcomes for Clinically Localized High-Risk Prostate Cancer

IMPORTANCE

There is a lack of data evaluating the association of surgical delay time (SDT) with outcomes in patients with localized, high-risk prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association of SDT of radical prostatectomy and final pathological and survival outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study used data from the US National Cancer Database (NCDB) and identified all patients with clinically localized (cT1-2cN0cM0) high-risk prostate adenocarcinoma diagnosed between 2006 and 2016 who underwent radical prostatectomy. Data analyses were performed from April 1 to April 12, 2020.

EXPOSURES

SDT was defined as the number of days between the initial cancer diagnosis and radical prostatectomy. SDT was categorized into 5 groups: 31 to 60, 61 to 90, 91 to 120, 121 to 150, and 151 to 180 days.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcomes were predetermined as adverse pathological outcomes after radical prostatectomy, including pT3-T4 disease, pN-positive disease, and positive surgical margin. The adverse pathological score (APS) was defined as an accumulated score of the 3 outcomes (0-3). An APS of 2 or higher was considered a separate outcome to capture cases with more aggressive pathological features. The secondary outcome was overall survival.

RESULTS

Of the 32 184 patients included in the study, the median (interquartile range) age was 64 (59-68) years, and 25 548 (79.4%) were non-Hispanic White. Compared with an SDT of 31 to 60 days, longer SDTs were not associated with higher risks of having any adverse pathological outcomes (odds ratio [OR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.80-1.12; P = .53), pT3-T4 disease (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.83-1.17; P = .87), pN-positive disease (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.59-1.06; P = .12), positive surgical margin (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74-1.05; P = .17), or APS greater than or equal to 2 (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.74-1.05; P = .17). Longer SDT was also not associated with worse overall survival (for SDT of 151-180 days, hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.79-1.59, P = .53). Subgroup analyses performed for patients with very high-risk disease (primary Gleason score 5) and sensitivity analyses with SDT considered as a continuous variable yielded similar results.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study of patients who underwent radical prostatectomy within 180 days of diagnosis for high-risk prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer could be safely delayed up to 6 months after diagnosis.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the surgical activity of Pediatric Urology: analysis of postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused a pandemic of global impact that forced social-political measures to be taken, such as the declaration of the state of alarm in Spain. At the same time, the reorganization of the pediatric medical-surgical activities and infrastructures was carried out, with the consequent suspension of the non-urgent surgical activity of Pediatric Urology. We analyzed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical activity in a Pediatric Urology division, as well as surgical complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of epidemiological, clinical and surgical data was carried out, including complications and readmissions of all patients operated on in the division of Pediatric Urology within the duration of the state of alarm. Five time periods have been created according to the de-escalation phases.

RESULTS

Forty-nine surgical procedures were carried out on 45 patients (8 prior to the implementation of the de-escalation phases). High priority pathologies were the most frequent in the first phases, being the ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction the most prevalent. Four complications were recorded (8.8%), none of them were respiratory.

CONCLUSIONS

The EAU recommendations for the resumption of surgical activity have allowed a correct, safe and gradual transition to the routine surgical activity in Pediatric Urology. The Clavien-Dindo classification is useful and valid for application in this division. No respiratory complications have been reported that could be attributable to the pandemic situation.

Urological surgery during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Descriptive analysis of the experience in a Urology Department across the pandemic phases

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Urological surgery during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Descriptive analysis of the experience in a Urology Department across the pandemic phases

INTRODUCTION

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has changed the urological practice around the world. Our objective is to describe the outcomes presented by patients undergoing surgery in the urology department of a tertiary hospital, across the pandemic phases.

METHODS

Observational, cohort study including all patients undergoing surgery from March 1 to May 14. According to the hospital organization, we identified three periods: there were no changes during the first two weeks (1st. period), the following seven weeks, when only urgent interventions were carried out after performance of nasopharyngeal swab test (2nd. period), and finally, elective surgery was resumed on May 4, after the implementation of a multidisciplinary screening protocol (3rd. period). Demographic, baseline, surgical and perioperative variables, as well as postoperative outcomes, were obtained in a retrospective (periods 1 and 2) and prospective (period 3) manner. Telephone follow-up was initiated at least 3 weeks after hospital discharge.

RESULTS

103 urological surgeries were performed, and 11 patients were diagnosed with COVID-19, 8 of them within the 1st.

PERIOD

The diagnosis was already known in 1 patient, while the other 10 developed the disease in an average of 25 days after the intervention and 16,6 days after discharge. Of seven transplant patients, four got the infection. Three deaths were recorded due to the disease: a 69-year-old woman transplanted and two men over 80 with comorbidities and high anesthetic risk who underwent drainage of retroperitoneal abscess and retrograde intrarenal surgery, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 infection mainly affected renal transplant recipients or elderly patients with high anesthetic risk, during the first 2 weeks of the pandemic. After implementing preoperative PCR tests and a comprehensive screening protocol, cases were substantially reduced, and safe surgical procedures were achieved.

Assessment of Time-to-Treatment Initiation and Survival in a Cohort of Patients With Common Cancers

Importance

Resource limitations because of pandemic or other stresses on infrastructure necessitate the triage of time-sensitive care, including cancer treatments. Optimal time to treatment is underexplored, so recommendations for which cancer treatments can be deferred are often based on expert opinion.

Objective

To evaluate the association between increased time to definitive therapy and mortality as a function of cancer type and stage for the 4 most prevalent cancers in the US.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study assessed treatment and outcome information from patients with nonmetastatic breast, prostate, non-small cell lung (NSCLC), and colon cancers from 2004 to 2015, with data analyzed January to March 2020. Data on outcomes associated with appropriate curative-intent surgical, radiation, or medical therapy were gathered from the National Cancer Database.

Exposures

Time-to-treatment initiation (TTI), the interval between diagnosis and therapy, using intervals of 8 to 60, 61 to 120, 121 to 180, and greater than 180 days.

Main Outcomes and Measures

5-year and 10-year predicted all-cause mortality.

Results

This study included 2 241 706 patients (mean [SD] age 63 [11.9] years, 1 268 794 [56.6%] women, 1 880 317 [83.9%] White): 1 165 585 (52.0%) with breast cancer, 853 030 (38.1%) with prostate cancer, 130 597 (5.8%) with NSCLC, and 92 494 (4.1%) with colon cancer. Median (interquartile range) TTI by cancer was 32 (21-48) days for breast, 79 (55-117) days for prostate, 41 (27-62) days for NSCLC, and 26 (16-40) days for colon. Across all cancers, a general increase in the 5-year and 10-year predicted mortality was associated with increasing TTI. The most pronounced mortality association was for colon cancer (eg, 5 y predicted mortality, stage III: TTI 61-120 d, 38.9% vs. 181-365 d, 47.8%), followed by stage I NSCLC (5 y predicted mortality: TTI 61-120 d, 47.4% vs 181-365 d, 47.6%), while survival for prostate cancer was least associated (eg, 5 y predicted mortality, high risk: TTI 61-120 d, 12.8% vs 181-365 d, 14.1%), followed by breast cancer (eg, 5 y predicted mortality, stage I: TTI 61-120 d, 11.0% vs. 181-365 d, 15.2%). A nonsignificant difference in treatment delays and worsened survival was observed for stage II lung cancer patients-who had the highest all-cause mortality for any TTI regardless of treatment timing.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, for all studied cancers there was evidence that shorter TTI was associated with lower mortality, suggesting an indirect association between treatment deferral and mortality that may not become evident for years. In contrast to current pandemic-related guidelines, these findings support more timely definitive treatment for intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer.

Trends in urologic oncology clinical practice and medical education under COVID-19 pandemic: An international survey of senior clinical and academic urologists

OBJECTIVE

Ad-hoc guidelines for managing the COVID-19 pandemic are published worldwide. We investigated international applications of such policies in the urologic-oncology community.

METHODS

A 20-item survey was e-mailed via SurveyMonkey to 100 international senior urologic-oncology surgeons. Leaders' policies regarding clinical/surgical management and medical education were surveyed probing demographics, affiliations, urologic-oncologic areas of interest, and current transportation restrictions. Data on COVID-19 burden were retrieved from the ECDC. Statistical analyses employed non-parametric tests (SPSS v.25.0, IBM).

RESULTS

Of 100 leaders from 17 countries, 63 responded to our survey, with 58 (92%) reporting university and/or cancer-center affiliations. Policies on new-patient visits remained mostly unchanged, while follow-up visits for low-risk diseases were mostly postponed, for example, 83.3% for small renal mass (SRM). Radical prostatectomy was delayed in 76.2% of cases, while maintaining scheduled timing for radical cystectomy (71.7%). Delays were longer in Europe than in the Americas for kidney cancer (SRM follow-up, P = 0.014), prostate cancer (new visits, P = 0.003), and intravesical therapy for intermediate-risk bladder cancer (P = 0.043). In Europe, COVID-19 burden correlated with policy adaptation, for example, nephrectomy delays for T2 disease (r = 0.5, P =0.005). Regarding education policies, trainees' medical education was mainly unchanged, whereas senior urologists' planned attendance at professional meetings dropped from 6 (IQR 1-11) to 2 (IQR 0-5) (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Under COVID-19, senior urologic-oncology surgeons worldwide apply risk-stratified approaches to timing of clinical and surgical schedules. Policies regarding trainee education were not significantly affected. We suggest establishment of an international consortium to create a directive for coping with such future challenges to global healthcare.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the surgical activity of Pediatric Urology: analysis of postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification

Introduction and objective

The "Coronavirus Disease 2019" (COVID-19) has caused a pandemic of global impact that forced social-political measures to be taken, such as the declaration of the state of alarm in Spain. At the same time, the reorganization of the pediatric medical-surgical activities and infrastructures was carried out, with the consequent suspension of the non-urgent surgical activity of Pediatric Urology. We analyzed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical activity in a Pediatric Urology division, as well as surgical complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.

Materials and methods

A systematic review of epidemiological, clinical and surgical data was carried out, including complications and readmissions of all patients operated on in the division of Pediatric Urology within the duration of the state of alarm. Five time periods have been created according to the de-escalation phases.

Results

Forty-nine surgical procedures were carried out on 45 patients (8 prior to the implementation of the de-escalation phases). High priority pathologies were the most frequent in the first phases, being the ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction the most prevalent. Four complications were recorded (8.8%), none of them were respiratory.

Conclusions

The EAU recommendations for the resumption of surgical activity have allowed a correct, safe and gradual transition to the routine surgical activity in Pediatric Urology. The Clavien-Dindo classification is useful and valid for application in this division. No respiratory complications have been reported that could be attributable to the pandemic situation.

Challenges in Urology during the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a global health threat. This disease has brought about huge changes in the priorities of medical and surgical procedures. This short review article summarizes several test methods for COVID-19 that are currently being used or under development. This paper also introduces the corresponding changes in the diagnosis and treatment of urological diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic. We further discuss the potential impacts of the pandemic on urology, including the outpatient setting, clinical work, teaching, and research.

Consensus of multiple national guidelines: agreed strategies for initial stone management during COVID-19

PURPOSE

To review the existing available information regarding urolithiasis management and the impact of COVID-19 on this, and propose recommendations for management of emergency urolithiasis presentations in the COVID-19 era.

METHODS

Review of published guidelines produced by Urological Governing Bodies, followed by the literature review regarding urolithiasis management during the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

Consistent recommendations across guidelines and literature were that urolithiasis with concurrent sepsis or renal failure remains a urological emergency warranting urgent intervention within the pandemic environment. Ureteric stenting and percutaneous nephrostomy are considered equivalent for decompression in this setting, with both ideally to be performed under local anaesthesia where possible to spare ventilators and reduce aerosol-generating procedures. Greater utilization of medical expulsive therapy and dissolution chemolysis may occur during the pandemic, and longer indwelling stent times may be accepted while definite stone clearance is deferred.

CONCLUSIONS

Urolithiasis will continue to be a source of emergency presentations requiring urgent intervention during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, it is possible to limit these interventions to decompression of the collecting system in the setting of concurrent obstruction or infection, performed under local anaesthesia to limit use of resources and minimise aerosol-generating procedures, with deferral of definitive management.

COVID-19 pandemic impact on clinical outcomes of patients with obstructive pyelonephritis

Purpose

Obstructive pyelonephritis is a common urologic emergency that requires prompt decompression of the collecting system. The COVID-19 pandemic has changed patient flow and healthcare strategies at numerous emergency departments across Brazil with still unknown consequences for the population. This study sought to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on clinical outcomes in patients with acute obstructive pyelonephritis at a tertiary academic center.

Materials and methods

After Institutional Review Board approval, a retrospective chart review of patients who required decompression of the collecting system due to acute obstructive pyelonephritis from June 2019 to July 2020 was conducted. Basic demographic information, pre-operative, and peri-operative data were recorded. Patients were assigned in “Pre-Covid” and “Post-Covid” groups based on the admission dates.

Results

A total of 63 patients were included, with 40 patients in the Pre-Covid group and 23 in the Post-Covid group. Patients from the Post-Covid group presented at the ER later after symptoms onset (7.8 vs. 4.3 days; p = 0.012), had higher rates of SIRS (57% vs. 25%; p = 0.012), perirenal abscesses (13% vs. 0%; p = 0.019), overall complications (p = 0.047) and presented longer hospital length of stay (7.6 vs. 3.8; p = 0.007).

Conclusion

During the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with acute obstructive pyelonephritis presented later for evaluation at the ER, had higher disease severity and longer hospital length of stay when compared to the pre-COVID group of patients with the same pathology.

Evaluation of uro-oncological surgical treatment during the Sars-CoV-2 pandemic in a Brazilian tertiary oncology institution, the new world epicenter

Introduction:

The rapid spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has dramatic effects on individuals and health care systems. In our institute, a tertiary oncologic public hospital with high surgical volume, we prioritize maintaining cancer treatment as well as possible. The aim of this study is to evaluate if uro-oncological surgeries at pandemic are safe.

Materials and Methods:

We evaluated patients who underwent uro-oncological procedures. Epidemiological data, information on COVID-19 infection related to surgery and clinical characteristics of non-survival operative patients with COVID-19 infections were analyzed.

Results:

From 213 patients analyzed, Covid-19 symptoms were noticed in 8 patients at preoperative process or at hospital admission postponing operation; 161 patients were submitted to elective surgery and 44 to emergency surgery. From patients submitted to elective surgeries, we had 1 patient with laboratory confirmation of COVID-19 (0,6%), with mild symptoms and quick discharge. From the urgencies group, we had 6(13%) patients tested positive; 5 were taken to ICU with 4 deaths.

Conclusion:

Elective uro-oncological procedures at the COVID-19 epidemic period in a COVID-19-free Institute are safe, and patients who need urgent procedures, with a long period of hospitalization, need special care to avoid COVID-19 infection and its outcomes.

Design of an assistance protocol for the restart of scheduled urologic surgery in a COVID-19 epidemic period

OBJECTIVE

Design a care protocol to restart scheduled surgical activity in a Urology service of a third level hospital in the Community of Madrid, in a safe way for our patients and professionals in the context of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus epidemic.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A multidisciplinary group reviewed the different recommendations of the literature, national and international health organizations and scientific societies, as well as their application to our environment. Once scheduled surgery has restarted, the patients undergoing surgery for complications related to COVID-19 are being followed up.

RESULTS

Since the resumption of surgical activity, 19 patients have been scheduled, of which 2 have been suspended for presenting COVID-19, one diagnosed by positive PCR for SARS-CoV-2, and another by laboratory and imaging findings compatible with this infection. With a median follow-up of 10 days (4-14 days), no complications related to COVID-19 were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary results indicate that the protocol designed to ensure the correct application of preventive measures against the transmission of coronavirus infection is being safe and effective.

The dramatic COVID 19 outbreak in Italy is responsible of a huge drop of urological surgical activity: a multicenter observational study

Objective

To describe the trend in surgical volume in urology in Italy during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) outbreak, as a result of the abrupt reorganisation of the Italian national health system to augment care provision to symptomatic patients with COVID‐19.

Methods

A total of 33 urological units with physicians affiliated to the AGILE consortium (Italian Group for Advanced Laparo‐Endoscopic Surgery; www.agilegroup.it) were surveyed. Urologists were asked to report the amount of surgical elective procedures week‐by‐week, from the beginning of the emergency to the following month.

Results

The 33 hospitals involved in the study account overall for 22 945 beds and are distributed in 13/20 Italian regions. Before the outbreak, the involved urology units performed overall 1213 procedures/week, half of which were oncological. A month later, the number of surgeries had declined by 78%. Lombardy, the first region with positive COVID‐19 cases, experienced a 94% reduction. The decrease in oncological and non‐oncological surgical activity was 35.9% and 89%, respectively. The trend of the decline showed a delay of roughly 2 weeks for the other regions.

Conclusion

Italy, a country with a high fatality rate from COVID‐19, experienced a sudden decline in surgical activity. This decline was inversely related to the increase in COVID‐19 care, with potential harm particularly in the oncological field. The Italian experience may be helpful for future surgical pre‐planning in other countries not so drastically affected by the disease to date.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the surgical activity of Pediatric Urology: analysis of postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused a pandemic of global impact that forced social-political measures to be taken, such as the declaration of the state of alarm in Spain. At the same time, the reorganization of the pediatric medical-surgical activities and infrastructures was carried out, with the consequent suspension of the non-urgent surgical activity of Pediatric Urology. We analyzed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical activity in a Pediatric Urology division, as well as surgical complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of epidemiological, clinical and surgical data was carried out, including complications and readmissions of all patients operated on in the division of Pediatric Urology within the duration of the state of alarm. Five time periods have been created according to the de-escalation phases.

RESULTS

Forty-nine surgical procedures were carried out on 45 patients (8 prior to the implementation of the de-escalation phases). High priority pathologies were the most frequent in the first phases, being the ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction the most prevalent. Four complications were recorded (8.8%), none of them were respiratory.

CONCLUSIONS

The EAU recommendations for the resumption of surgical activity have allowed a correct, safe and gradual transition to the routine surgical activity in Pediatric Urology. The Clavien-Dindo classification is useful and valid for application in this division. No respiratory complications have been reported that could be attributable to the pandemic situation.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pediatric operations: a retrospective study of Chinese children

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to quantify the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on pediatric operations, and establish preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative protocols to improve the pediatric operations.

METHODS

We here compare the number of patients who underwent surgery in Chongqing Medical University Affiliated Children's Hospital during the pandemic (January 23-March 11), after the pandemic (March 12-April 30), after our measures were put in place (May 1-May 21), and the equivalent period in 2019.

RESULT

During the COVID-19 pandemic, 62.68% fewer patients underwent surgery than during the homologous period of time 1 year earlier (P < 0.01). After the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of orchidopexy cases increased significantly from 175.14 to 504.57 per week (P < 0.01). The large number of patients that accrued in our hospital may have increased the risk of COVID-19 transmission. In response, hospitals and clinics have made protocols and reorganized healthcare facilities (e.g., performing nucleic acid tests (NAT), adding adequate personal protective equipment (PPE)) from May 1, 2020. After the measures were implemented, the number of operations performed remained stable and comparable to the pre-pandemic period. COVID-19 RNA detection was performed in 5104 cases and there were no new confirmed cases in our hospital.

CONCLUSION

This outbreak of COVID-19 has affected not only individuals with COVID-19 but also patients seeking surgical operations. Understanding the present situation helps clinicians provide a high level of treatment to all children.

Identification of Risk Factors and Symptoms of COVID-19: Analysis of Biomedical Literature and Social Media Data

BACKGROUND

In December 2019, the COVID-19 outbreak started in China and rapidly spread around the world. Lack of a vaccine or optimized intervention raised the importance of characterizing risk factors and symptoms for the early identification and successful treatment of patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate and analyze biomedical literature and public social media data to understand the association of risk factors and symptoms with the various outcomes observed in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

Through semantic analysis, we collected 45 retrospective cohort studies, which evaluated 303 clinical and demographic variables across 13 different outcomes of patients with COVID-19, and 84,140 Twitter posts from 1036 COVID-19-positive users. Machine learning tools to extract biomedical information were introduced to identify mentions of uncommon or novel symptoms in tweets. We then examined and compared two data sets to expand our landscape of risk factors and symptoms related to COVID-19.

RESULTS

From the biomedical literature, approximately 90% of clinical and demographic variables showed inconsistent associations with COVID-19 outcomes. Consensus analysis identified 72 risk factors that were specifically associated with individual outcomes. From the social media data, 51 symptoms were characterized and analyzed. By comparing social media data with biomedical literature, we identified 25 novel symptoms that were specifically mentioned in tweets but have been not previously well characterized. Furthermore, there were certain combinations of symptoms that were frequently mentioned together in social media.

CONCLUSIONS

Identified outcome-specific risk factors, symptoms, and combinations of symptoms may serve as surrogate indicators to identify patients with COVID-19 and predict their clinical outcomes in order to provide appropriate treatments.

Impact of coronavirus syndromes on physical and mental health of health care workers: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Health care workers (HCW) are at high risk of developing physical/mental health outcomes related to coronavirus syndromes. Nature and frequency of these outcomes are undetermined.

METHODS

PRISMA/MOOSE-compliant (PROSPERO-CRD42020180205) systematic review of Web of Science/grey literature until 15th April 2020, to identify studies reporting physical/mental health outcomes in HCW infected/exposed to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome -SARS-, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome -MERS-, Novel coronavirus -COVID-19-. Proportion random effect meta-analyses, I2 statistic, quality assessment and sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

115 articles were included (n=60,458 HCW, age 36.1±7.1, 77.1% female). Physical health outcomes: 75.9% HCW infected by SARS/MERS/COVID-19 reported fever (95%CI=65.9-83.7%, k=12, n=949), 47.9% cough (95%CI=39.2-56.8%, k=14, n=970), 43.6% myalgias (95%CI=31.9-56.0%, k=13, n=898), 42.3% chills (95%CI=20.2-67.9%, k=7, n=716), 41.2% fatigue (95%CI=18.2-68.8%, k=6, n=386), 34.6% headaches (95%CI=23.1-48.2%, k=11, n=893), 31.2% dyspnoea (95%CI=23.2-40.5%, k=12, n=1003), 25.3% sore throat (95%CI=18.8-33.2%, k=8, n=747), 22.2% nausea/vomiting (95%CI=14.9-31.8%, k=6, n=662), 18.8% diarrhoea (95%CI=11.9-28.4%, k=9, n=824). Mental health outcomes: 62.5% HCW exposed to SARS/MERS/COVID-19 reported general health concerns (95%CI=57.0-67,8%, k=2, n=2254), 43.7% fear (95%CI=33.9-54.0%, k=4, n=584), 37.9% insomnia (95%CI=30.9-45.5%, k=6, n=5067), 37.8% psychological distress (95%CI=28.4-48.2%, k=15, n=24,346), 34.4% burnout (95%CI=19.3-53.5%, k=3, n=1337), 29.0% anxiety features (95%CI=14.2-50.3%, k=6, n=9191), 26.3% depressive symptoms (95%CI=12.5-47.1%, k=8, n=9893), 20.7% post-traumatic stress disorder features (95%CI=13.2-31%, k=11, n=3826), 16.1% somatisation (95%CI=0.2-96.0%, k=2, n=2184), 14.0% stigmatisation feelings (95%CI=6.4-28.1%, k=2, n=411).

LIMITATIONS

Limited amount of evidence for some outcomes and suboptimal design in several studies included.

CONCLUSIONS

SARS/MERS/COVID-19 have a substantial impact on the physical and mental health of HCW, which should become a priority for public health strategies.

Deferring Elective Urologic Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Patients' Perspective

OBJECTIVES

To explore the perspective of urological patients on the possibility to defer elective surgery due to the fear of contracting COVID-19.

METHODS

All patients scheduled for elective urological procedures for malignant or benign diseases at 2 high-volume centers were administered a questionnaire, through structured telephone interviews, between April 24 and 27, 2020. The questionnaire included 3 questions: (1) In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, would you defer the planned surgical intervention? (2) If yes, when would you be willing to undergo surgery? (3) What do you consider potentially more harmful for your health: the risk of contracting COVID-19 during hospitalization or the potential consequences of delaying surgical treatment?

RESULTS

Overall, 332 patients were included (51.5% and 48.5% in the oncology and benign groups, respectively). Of these, 47.9% patients would have deferred the planned intervention (33.3% vs 63.4%; P < .001), while the proportion of patients who would have preferred to delay surgery for more than 6 months was comparable between the groups (87% vs 80%). These answers were influenced by patient age and American Society of Anesthesiologists score (in the Oncology group) and by the underlying urological condition (in the benign group). Finally, 182 (54.8%) patients considered the risk of COVID-19 potentially more harmful than the risk of delaying surgery (37% vs 73%; P < .001). This answer was driven by patient age and the underlying disease in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings reinforce the importance of shared decision-making before urological surgery, leveraging patients' values and expectations to refine the paradigm of evidence-based medicine during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.