1
|
Barone B, Napolitano L, Reccia P, Calace FP, De Luca L, Olivetta M, Stizzo M, Rubinacci A, Della Rosa G, Lecce A, Romano L, Sciorio C, Spirito L, Mattiello G, Vastarella MG, Papi S, Calogero A, Varlese F, Tataru OS, Ferro M, Del Biondo D, Napodano G, Vastarella V, Lucarelli G, Balsamo R, Fusco F, Crocetto F, Amicuzi U. Advances in Urinary Diversion: From Cutaneous Ureterostomy to Orthotopic Neobladder Reconstruction-A Comprehensive Review. J Pers Med 2024; 14:392. [PMID: 38673019 PMCID: PMC11051023 DOI: 10.3390/jpm14040392] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2024] [Revised: 04/01/2024] [Accepted: 04/06/2024] [Indexed: 04/28/2024] Open
Abstract
Bladder cancer ranks as the 10th most prevalent cancer globally with an increasing incidence. Radical cystectomy combined with urinary diversion represents the standard treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer, offering a range of techniques tailored to patient factors. Overall, urinary diversions are divided into non-continent and continent. Among the first category, cutaneous ureterostomy and ileal conduit represent the most common procedures while in the second category, it could be possible to describe another subclassification which includes ureterosigmoidostomy, continent diversions requiring catheterization and orthotopic voiding pouches and neobladders. In this comprehensive review, urinary diversions are described in their technical aspects, providing a summary of almost all alternatives to urinary diversion post-radical cystectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Biagio Barone
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, AORN Sant’Anna e San Sebastiano, 81100 Caserta, Italy; (F.F.); (U.A.)
| | - Luigi Napolitano
- Department of Neurosciences and Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy; (L.N.); (A.R.); (G.D.R.); (A.L.); (L.R.); (G.M.); (S.P.); (F.C.)
| | - Pasquale Reccia
- Urology Unit, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Monaldi Hospital, 80131 Naples, Italy; (P.R.); (F.P.C.); (R.B.)
| | - Francesco Paolo Calace
- Urology Unit, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Monaldi Hospital, 80131 Naples, Italy; (P.R.); (F.P.C.); (R.B.)
| | - Luigi De Luca
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Multispecialty, AORN Antonio Cardarelli, 80131 Naples, Italy;
| | - Michelangelo Olivetta
- Urology Unit, Gaetano Fucito Hospital, AOU San Giovanni di Dio e Ruggi d’Aragona, 84085 Mercato San Severino, Italy;
| | - Marco Stizzo
- Urology Unit, Department of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, 80131 Naples, Italy; (M.S.); (L.S.)
| | - Andrea Rubinacci
- Department of Neurosciences and Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy; (L.N.); (A.R.); (G.D.R.); (A.L.); (L.R.); (G.M.); (S.P.); (F.C.)
| | - Giampiero Della Rosa
- Department of Neurosciences and Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy; (L.N.); (A.R.); (G.D.R.); (A.L.); (L.R.); (G.M.); (S.P.); (F.C.)
| | - Arturo Lecce
- Department of Neurosciences and Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy; (L.N.); (A.R.); (G.D.R.); (A.L.); (L.R.); (G.M.); (S.P.); (F.C.)
| | - Lorenzo Romano
- Department of Neurosciences and Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy; (L.N.); (A.R.); (G.D.R.); (A.L.); (L.R.); (G.M.); (S.P.); (F.C.)
| | | | - Lorenzo Spirito
- Urology Unit, Department of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, 80131 Naples, Italy; (M.S.); (L.S.)
| | - Gennaro Mattiello
- Department of Neurosciences and Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy; (L.N.); (A.R.); (G.D.R.); (A.L.); (L.R.); (G.M.); (S.P.); (F.C.)
| | - Maria Giovanna Vastarella
- Gynaecology Unit, Department of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, 80131 Naples, Italy;
| | - Salvatore Papi
- Department of Neurosciences and Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy; (L.N.); (A.R.); (G.D.R.); (A.L.); (L.R.); (G.M.); (S.P.); (F.C.)
| | - Armando Calogero
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, Section of General Surgery, University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy; (A.C.); (F.V.)
| | - Filippo Varlese
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, Section of General Surgery, University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy; (A.C.); (F.V.)
| | - Octavian Sabin Tataru
- Department of Simulation Applied in Medicine, The Institution Organizing University Doctoral Studies (I.O.S.U.D.), George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Sciences, and Technology from Târgu Mureș, 540142 Târgu Mureș, Romania;
| | - Matteo Ferro
- Department of Urology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy;
| | - Dario Del Biondo
- Department of Urology, Ospedale del Mare, ASL NA1 Centro, 80147 Naples, Italy; (D.D.B.); (G.N.)
| | - Giorgio Napodano
- Department of Urology, Ospedale del Mare, ASL NA1 Centro, 80147 Naples, Italy; (D.D.B.); (G.N.)
| | - Vincenzo Vastarella
- Department of Translational Medical Sciences, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, 80131 Naples, Italy;
- Division of Cardiology, Cardiovascular Department, AORN Sant’Anna e San Sebastiano, 81100 Caserta, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Lucarelli
- Urology, Andrology and Kidney Transplantation Unit, Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, University of Bari, 70124 Bari, Italy;
| | - Raffaele Balsamo
- Urology Unit, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Monaldi Hospital, 80131 Naples, Italy; (P.R.); (F.P.C.); (R.B.)
| | - Ferdinando Fusco
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, AORN Sant’Anna e San Sebastiano, 81100 Caserta, Italy; (F.F.); (U.A.)
- Urology Unit, Department of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, 80131 Naples, Italy; (M.S.); (L.S.)
| | - Felice Crocetto
- Department of Neurosciences and Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy; (L.N.); (A.R.); (G.D.R.); (A.L.); (L.R.); (G.M.); (S.P.); (F.C.)
| | - Ugo Amicuzi
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, AORN Sant’Anna e San Sebastiano, 81100 Caserta, Italy; (F.F.); (U.A.)
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Piramide F, Turri F, Amparore D, Fallara G, De Groote R, Knipper S, Wuernschimmel C, Bravi CA, Lambert E, Di Maida F, Liakos N, Pellegrino F, Andras I, Mastrorosa A, Tillu N, Mastroianni R, Paciotti M, Wenzel M, Bianchi R, di Trapani E, Moschovas MC, Gandaglia G, Moschini M, D'Hondt F, Rocco B, Fiori C, Galfano A, Minervini A, Simone G, Briganti A, De Cobelli O, Gaston R, Montorsi F, Breda A, Wiklund P, Porpiglia F, Mottrie A, Larcher A, Dell'Oglio P. Atlas of Intracorporeal Orthotopic Neobladder Techniques After Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy and Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes. Eur Urol 2024; 85:348-360. [PMID: 38044179 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.11.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2023] [Revised: 10/24/2023] [Accepted: 11/20/2023] [Indexed: 12/05/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Multiple and heterogeneous techniques have been described for orthotopic neobladder (ONB) reconstruction after robot-assisted radical cystectomy. Nonetheless, a systematic assessment of all the available options is lacking. OBJECTIVE To provide the first comprehensive step-by-step description of all the available techniques for robotic intracorporeal ONB together with individual intraoperative, perioperative and functional outcomes based on a systematic review of the literature. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We performed a systematic review of the literature, and MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify original articles describing different robotic intracorporeal ONB techniques and reporting intra- and perioperative outcomes. Studies were categorized according to ONB type, providing a synthesis of the current evidence. Video material was provided by experts in the field to illustrate the surgical technique of each intracorporeal ONB. SURGICAL PROCEDURE Nine different ONB types were identified: Studer, Hautmann, Y shape, U shape, Bordeaux, Pyramid, Shell, Florence Robotic Intracorporeal Neobladder, and Padua Ileal Neobladder. MEASUREMENTS Continuous and categorical variables are presented as mean ± standard deviation and as frequencies and proportions, respectively. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Of 2587 studies identified, 19 met our inclusion criteria. No cohort studies or randomized control trials comparing different neobladder types are available. Available techniques for intracorporeal robotic ONB reconstruction have similar operative time, estimated blood loss, intraoperative complications, and length of stay. Major variability exists concerning postoperative complications and functional outcomes, likely related to reporting bias. CONCLUSIONS Several techniques are described for intracorporeal ONB during robot-assisted radical cystectomy with comparable perioperative outcomes. We provide the first step-by-step surgical atlas for robot-assisted ONB reconstruction. Further comparative studies are needed to assess any advantage of one technique over others. PATIENT SUMMARY Patients elected for radical cystectomy should be aware that multiple techniques for robotic orthotopic neobladder are available, but that current evidence does not favor one type over the others.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Federico Piramide
- Department of Oncology, Division of Urology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy; Department of Urology, OLV Hospital, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium.
| | - Filippo Turri
- Department of Urology, ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Daniele Amparore
- Department of Oncology, Division of Urology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Fallara
- Department of Urology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Ruben De Groote
- Department of Urology, OLV Hospital, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium
| | - Sophie Knipper
- Department of Urology, Vivantes Klinikum am Urban, Berlin, Germany
| | | | - Carlo Andrea Bravi
- Department of Urology, OLV Hospital, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium; Department of Urology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Edward Lambert
- Department of Urology, OLV Hospital, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium
| | - Fabrizio Di Maida
- Department of Urology, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Nikolaos Liakos
- Department of Urology, Medical Faculty and Medical Centre of the University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Francesco Pellegrino
- Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Iulia Andras
- Department of Urology, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Alessandro Mastrorosa
- Unit of Urology, Clinique Saint-Augustin, Bordeaux, France; Urology Unit, IRCCS Istituto Tumori "Giovanni Paolo II", Bari, Italy
| | - Neeraja Tillu
- Department of Urology, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY, USA
| | - Riccardo Mastroianni
- Department of Urology, IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Marco Paciotti
- Department of Urology, OLV Hospital, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium
| | - Mike Wenzel
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Roberto Bianchi
- Department of Urology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Ettore di Trapani
- Department of Urology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Giorgio Gandaglia
- Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Marco Moschini
- Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Bernando Rocco
- Department of Urology, ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Cristian Fiori
- Department of Oncology, Division of Urology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
| | - Antonio Galfano
- Department of Urology, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | - Andrea Minervini
- Department of Urology, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Simone
- Department of Urology, IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Ottavio De Cobelli
- Department of Urology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Richard Gaston
- Unit of Urology, Clinique Saint-Augustin, Bordeaux, France
| | - Francesco Montorsi
- Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Alberto Breda
- Department of Urology, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Fundaciò Puigvert, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Peter Wiklund
- Department of Urology, Karolinska University Hospital, Solna, Sweden
| | - Francesco Porpiglia
- Department of Oncology, Division of Urology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
| | - Alexandre Mottrie
- Department of Urology, OLV Hospital, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium
| | - Alessandro Larcher
- Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Paolo Dell'Oglio
- Department of Urology, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Salihagic IK, Hrkac A, Ovcaricek S, Bokarica P, Gilja I. Outcome of small versus big capacity Hautmann neobladder reconstruction: A prospective randomized study - a 5-year follow up. Technol Health Care 2024; 32:951-962. [PMID: 37661899 DOI: 10.3233/thc-230339] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/05/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Orthotopic urinary diversion is the preferred diversion after cystectomy. Neobladder reconstruction with a longer ileum segment (60 cm) is advantageous for obtaining a large capacity and continence at the beginning; however, the long-term risk of residual urine, chronic infection, and the need for intermittent catheterization is more pronounced with the neobladder constructed with a longer ileal segment compared to the neobladder tailored from the shorter ileal segment. OBJECTIVE To establish the differences in the functional outcome of a shorter (< 45 cm) and longer (⩾ 45 cm) ileal segment usage in the reconstruction of the Hautmann ileal neobladder following the radical cystectomy. METHODS Between July 2013 and September 2015, 121 patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer underwent radical cystectomy and Hautmann ileal neobladder reconstruction. Patients were divided into two groups, depending on the length of the ileum used for the diversion creation: < 45 cm of the ileum was used in the first group and ⩾ 45 cm in the second group. Five-year follow-up was performed at 1, 3, 6, and 9 months and 1 and 5 years. The main measured outcomes were functional outcomes and the quality of life. The evaluation included clinical, laboratory, and QLQ-C30 questionnaires. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U test, Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, ANOVA, and chi-squared tests. RESULTS Patients with a smaller neobladder had a better quality of life, and higher global health status scale score. Thirteen early and 21 late complications developed in 10 and 17 patients, respectively. There were significant differences in the need for clean intermittent self-catheterization (CIC) between the two groups: smaller-volume pouch patients had statistically decreased need for CIC in 5 year follow-up compared to larger-volume pouch patients (χ2 test = 8.245; df = 1; P= 0.004). Eighteen percent of patients with smaller neobladders had urinary tract infections in 5 years, compared to 35% with larger neobladders (χ2 test = 4.447; df = 1; P= 0.034). CONCLUSION Minimizing the length of the ileal segment needed for Hautmann neobladder reconstruction is feasible and provides better long-term results than larger-volume neobladders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Adelina Hrkac
- Department of Urology, University Hospital "Sveti Duh", Zagreb, Croatia
| | - Slaven Ovcaricek
- Department of Urology, University Hospital "Sveti Duh", Zagreb, Croatia
| | - Pero Bokarica
- Department of Urology, University Hospital "Sveti Duh", Zagreb, Croatia
| | - Ivan Gilja
- Department of Urology, University Hospital "Sveti Duh", Zagreb, Croatia
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Mostar, Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Guo L, Zhang T, Liang T, Chen J, Gao H. Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy with Ileal Orthotopic Neobladder for Bladder Cancer: Current Indications and Outcomes. Urol Int 2023; 108:242-253. [PMID: 37995673 PMCID: PMC11151991 DOI: 10.1159/000535032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/04/2023] [Accepted: 10/23/2023] [Indexed: 11/25/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) with ileal orthotopic neobladder (IONB) reconstruction is one of the most promising methods for bladder cancer treatment; its advantages include a small incision size, less blood loss, improved perioperative outcome and tumor prognosis, and a positive self-image postoperatively. The short-term benefits of various IONB reconstruction procedures reported thus far include a simple process, short operative time, less intraoperative bleeding, few postoperative complications, and good postoperative neobladder function; in the long term, these benefits engender good quality of life of the patients. Here, we explored and summarized the more novel and available IONB reconstruction procedures to identify the safest, most efficient, and simplest IONB reconstruction techniques for patients with bladder cancer. SUMMARY LRC with IONB reconstruction is technically feasible; however, most of the relevant studies have been short, employing a small sample size and a retrospective design. However, long-term, large-scale, prospective studies identifying the most appropriate bowel segments for IONB reconstruction, comparing intracorporeal and extracorporeal IONB reconstruction, assessing currently available IONBs, and resolving relevant postoperative complications further, with a focus on patients with bladder cancer, are warranted. KEY MESSAGE Several procedures for LRC with IONB reconstruction have been reported thus far. However, there is no consensus regarding the IONB reconstruction procedures most beneficial to patients with bladder cancer. Our review may aid researchers in developing a simple, safe, and efficient LRC with IONB reconstruction procedure for patients with bladder cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lin Guo
- Graduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, China
| | - Ting Zhang
- Ruikang Hospital Affiliated to Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, China
| | - Taisheng Liang
- Ruikang Hospital Affiliated to Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, China
- Guangxi Clinical Research Center for Kidney Diseases of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Nanning, China
| | - Jibing Chen
- Ruikang Hospital Affiliated to Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, China
- Guangxi Clinical Research Center for Kidney Diseases of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Nanning, China
| | - Hongjun Gao
- Ruikang Hospital Affiliated to Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, China
- Guangxi Clinical Research Center for Kidney Diseases of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Nanning, China
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Tsoi H, Elnasharty SF, Culha MG, De Cillis S, Guillot-Tantay C, Hervé F, Hüesch T, Raison N, Phé V, Osman NI. Current evidence of robotic-assisted surgery use in functional reconstructive and neuro-urology. Ther Adv Urol 2023; 15:17562872231213727. [PMID: 38046941 PMCID: PMC10693211 DOI: 10.1177/17562872231213727] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2022] [Accepted: 10/25/2023] [Indexed: 12/05/2023] Open
Abstract
The use of robot-assisted technology has been widely adopted in urological oncological surgery and its benefits have been well established. In recent years, robotic technology has also been used in several functional reconstructive and neuro-urology (FRNU) procedures. The aim of this review was to evaluate the current evidence in the use of robotic technology in the field of FRNU. We performed a PubMed-based literature search between July and August 2022. The keywords we included were 'robotic assisted', 'ureteric reimplantation', 'cystoplasty', 'ileal conduit', 'neobladder', 'sacrocolpopexy', 'colposuspension', 'artificial urinary sphincter', 'genitourinary fistula' and 'posterior urethral stenoses'. We identified the latest available evidence in the use of robotic technology in specific FRNU procedures such as the reconstruction of the ureters, bladder and urinary sphincter, urinary diversion, and repair of genitourinary prolapse and fistula. We found that there is a lack of prospective studies to assess the robotic-assisted approach in the field of FRNU. Despite this, the advantages that robotic technology can bring to the field of FRNU are evident, including better ergonomics and visual field, less blood loss and shorter hospital stays. There is therefore a need for further prospective studies with larger patient numbers and longer follow-up periods to establish the reproducibility of these results and the long-term efficacy of the procedures, as well as the impact on patient outcomes. Common index procedures and a standardized approach to these procedures should be identified to enhance training.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hermione Tsoi
- Department of Urology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Rd, Broomhall, Sheffield S10 2JF, UK
| | | | - Mehmet Gokhan Culha
- University of Health Sciences, Prof. Dr. Cemil Tascioglu City Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Sabrina De Cillis
- Department of Oncology, Division of Urology, University of Turin, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano (Turin), Italy
| | | | - François Hervé
- Department of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Tanja Hüesch
- Department of Urology and Pediatric Urology, University Medical Center of Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany
| | | | - Véronique Phé
- Department of Urology, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Tenon Academic Hospital, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | - Nadir I. Osman
- Department of Urology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| |
Collapse
|