INTERNET AND POSTAL SURVEY OF ENDOUROLOGIC PRACTICE PATTERNS AMONG AMERICAN UROLOGISTS:

Minimally Invasive Treatment of Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction: Optimizing Outcomes with Concomitant Cost Reduction

With the seemingly exponential increase in the use of minimally invasive techniques in urology, cost-benefit comparisons will continue to play a major part in establishing services and in improving those that already exist. The management of ureteropelvic junction obstruction is a focus of significant attention. An effective way of optimizing the economy of management is to understand the implications in terms of the success of each mode of treatment. Subsequently, costing models should be developed and applied in large-scale multicenter studies with the aid of health economists. The long-term benefits can then be assessed by also including patient's perceived quality of life. Economic assessment will not be enough to promote cost-effective practices. The take-up of any techniques will always be influenced not only by patient preference and surgeon expertise but also, perhaps ironically, by the way hospitals and surgeons are remunerated. In addition, the impact of the time taken to train a surgeon to carry out laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty competently may play a significant role. Until these issues are resolved, definitive recommendation for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction will continue to be made on an individual basis.

Practice patterns in the treatment of large renal stones

PURPOSE

To determine the current practice patterns of a large group of urologists in the treatment of large renal stones.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A survey was sent to all actively practicing members of the North Central Section of the American Urological Association. The questions pertained to age, time in practice, type of practice, time devoted to treating stones, residency training, case scenarios with treatment options, and whether they or a radiologist performed percutaneous access. The data were statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

The response rate was 51% (564/1102 surveys returned). Three quarters (73%) of the urologists were comfortable performing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), and 35% gave reasons they do not perform PCNL. Only 11% of those performing PCNL routinely obtained the percutaneous access themselves. Trends in the analysis included: (1) those trained to perform PCNL during residency were more often comfortable with this procedure; (2) younger urologists were more comfortable performing PCNL, even if they had been in practice for only a short time; (3) urologists in private practice were nearly as comfortable performing PCNL as were academic urologists; (4) urologists not comfortable with PCNL more often recommended SWL over PCNL as a primary treatment for moderate/large renal stones; and (5) few urologists routinely obtained percutaneous access themselves.

CONCLUSIONS

Many urologists trained in recent years are comfortable performing PCNL. The type of training received influences treatment recommendations, and percutaneous access is most often obtained by/in conjunction with radiologists. This information may be useful in guiding residency training programs in the preparation of residents for the treatment of large renal stones.