Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery Versus Miniaturized Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Kidney Stones >1cm: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials

CONTEXT

Although miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) are both options for treating >1cm kidney stones, controversies exist on whether one is more effective and safer than the other.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically appraise randomized trials comparing the effectiveness and safety of mPCNL and RIRS for treating >1cm kidney stones.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic search on PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted in August 2020 following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA). Randomized trials comparing mPCNL and RIRS for >1cm kidney stones, and reporting stone-free rate (SFR), hemoglobin drop, transfusion rate, length of hospital stay (LOS), and/or complications, were included.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Eight studies compared mPCNL and RIRS, but one was not included due to its high risk of bias. SFR was higher for mPCNL (RR: 1.06 [95% coefficient interval {CI}, 1.01-1.10], p=0.008). Hemoglobin drop was higher for mPCNL (mean difference [MD]: 0.35 [95% CI, 0.05-0.65] g/dl, p=0.02); however, transfusion rates were similar (p=0.44). Complication rate was similar between mPCNL and RIRS (p=0.39), and the LOS was higher for mPCNL (MD: 1.11 [95% CI, 0.06-2.16] d, p=0.04). A subgroup analysis of lower pole stones showed that SFR was higher for mPCNL (RR: 1.09 [95% CI, 1.00-1.19], p=0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Both approaches are effective and safe. Among these approaches, mPCNL has a higher SFR than RIRS for overall >1cm renal and lower pole stones, but longer LOS, and a higher hemoglobin drop that does not translate into higher transfusion rates. Complications are comparable.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Randomized trials have evaluated whether miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery is more effective and safer for treating >1cm stones. After comparing the stone-free rate, hemoglobin drop, transfusion rate, length of hospital stay, and complications between both the approaches, mPCNL was found to be slightly more effective, but both were equally safe.

Impact of COVID-19 on Clinical and Academic Urological Practice: A Survey from European Association of Urology Section of Uro-technology

Background

The unexpected coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has spread worldwide rapidly, developing into a global health crisis. At the same time, it has seriously impacted the daily activities in all the fields of urology.

Objective

To better understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical, academic, and scientific activities as well as on the quality of life of urologists from the main centers in Europe.

Design setting and participants

We conducted a survey using a 37-item questionnaire. The survey included three main sections: clinical practice, academic/scientific activities, and personal/social quality of life.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

A descriptive analysis was performed using the collected data.

Results and limitations

A total of 107 representatives affiliated to different centers from 22 countries completed the survey. Clinical activities were affected in 54.2% of the centers, and 85.0% of the elective surgeries were cancelled. Of the urological departments, 64.5% were still performing minimally invasive surgery for malignant disease. In 33.6% of the hospitals, dedicated and specially equipped operating theaters for COVID-19-positive patients were not available. According to 72.9% of participants, COVID-19 had a substantial negative impact on academic activities, and 82.3% of the respondents agreed that their quality of life has been affected negatively by the pandemic. Finally, 92.5% of the participants believe that the pandemic will have a moderate to severe impact on the health system of their countries.

Conclusions

Data collected in this survey provide insight into changes brought about in clinical and academic settings amid COVID-19. Along with shortages such as bed occupancy and personal protective equipment, it highlights negative impacts on academic and scientific activities, including the personal and social life of urologists.

Patient summary

It is essential to understand the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on clinical, academic, and scientific urological activities, as well as on related personal and social issues.

Giant Condyloma Acuminatum in the Genital, Perineal and Perianal Region in a Pediatric Patient. Literature Review and Case Report

Condyloma acuminata is caused by the proliferation of squamous epithelial cells in the presence of human papilloma virus (HPV) infection. There are several treatment options available for anogenital warts, however, none have proven to be more efficacious. We present the case of a 3 year-8 months-old male, diagnosed with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, who presented with multiple warts in the anogenital region. Lesions were treated with imiquimod 5%, electrosurgical resection and interferon α-2b. Combination of electrofulguration and interferon α-2b is an effective treatment option for children with giant condyloma accuminatum although recurrence is expected within a short follow-up period.