Purpose: Low dose noncontrast computerized tomography is becoming a common imaging tool to diagnose urolithiasis. We investigated its usefulness as a diagnostic tool in the outpatient setting. Materials and Methods: A total of 62 patients with suspected urolithiasis underwent standard renal stone protocol computerized tomography with a tube current of 160 mA. Images were modified by adding image noise to simulate tube currents of 70, 100 and 130 mA. Three urologists independently interpreted the original and simulated dose scans for stone number, location and associated signs of obstruction. In addition, the investigators rated the ease of interpreting the scans and their overall level of confidence. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in interobserver and intra-observer variability for stone detection or obstruction signs except significant interobserver variability in hydronephrosis and intra-observer variability in stranding categories. Each 1 mm increase in stone size increased the likelihood of a concordant response 3.55, 2.7 and 2-fold when reducing the tube current level by 19%, 38% and 56%, respectively (p = 0.001, 0.008 and 0.021, respectively). Multiple stones or index stone location were not associated with agreement. The overall level of confidence decreased with lower simulated doses, particularly in the bony pelvis (p <0.02). Conclusions: Low dose computerized tomography may serve as an effective tool in the setting of the urology clinic in patients with urolithiasis. This imaging tool can better assess urolithiasis and associated obstruction than plain abdominal radiographs, but it may be problematic with small stones (less than 2 mm) and evidence of distal ureteral obstruction. Its effectiveness as a long-term followup tool requires further prospective trials.

The use of ureteral access sheath (UAS) during ureteroscopy is controversial. We aimed to explore practice patterns of UAS during ureteroscopy for nephrolithiasis among endourologists worldwide. A 15-question survey was designed using the SurveyMonkey® platform. The questions covered the background and professional experience of the potential respondents, indications for UAS insertion, UAS caliber and possible complications associated with its use. The questions were anonymously tabulated in order to determine practice patterns of UAS during ureteroscopy for nephrolithiasis among endourologists. The survey was then distributed via e-mail to all the Endourological Society members. 216 members responded. 99.53% of the respondents practice as endourologists, 63.4% are fellowship trained and 74.4% are at least 6 years post-fellow. 73.2% practice in an academic facility. 77.3% perform at least 100 ureteroscopies annually. 46 and 76% routinely use UAS for the treatment of ureteral and kidney stones, respectively. In both cases, the 12/14 access sheath is the most common. 42% use UAS in primary ureteroscopy. 90.3% believe that a double J stent insertion is not mandatory prior to UAS insertion. 79.1% think the use of UAS does not increase postoperative complications rate, and if the latter does encounter, then most likely it is either a ureteral stricture (93.2%) or pain (48%). UAS is commonly used by highly skilled endourologists during ureteroscopy. 12/14 UAS is mostly used. Ureteral stricture and post-operative pain are proposed as possible complications following UAS introduction, however pre-stenting is not mandatory as overall low complication rate is expected.

The aim of this study was to examine ureteral stricture rate after the use of UAS in an unstented ureter and compare complications of smaller vs. larger-caliber UAS. We conducted a retrospective analysis of consecutive RIRS for renal stones, with the use of UAS in unstented ureters. We excluded cases with previous ureteroscopies, who carried ureteral stent or nephrostomy, had impacted stones, underwent radiation treatment, or had urinary tract malignancies. The primary outcome was formation of ureteral strictures diagnosed by hydronephrosis in ultrasound test and late secretion in dynamic renal scan. Secondary outcome was stone-free-rate (SFR) and complications. In addition, we compared safety and efficacy of smaller (9.5/11.5Fr) vs. larger-caliber (12/14Fr) UAS. The cohort included 165 patients with a median follow-up time of 115 days. There was no case of ureteral stricture formation after the use us UAS, despite using a larger-caliber UAS in nearly half the cases. Larger-caliber UAS was not associated with more complications compared to the smaller-caliber one (p = 0.780). SFR was non-significantly higher in the larger-caliber UAS group (p = 0.056), despite having a larger stone burden, and only stone number was associated with SFR (p = 0.003). These data suggest that the use of UAS during RIRS in an unstented ureter is safe and does not involve ureteral stricture formation after one procedure. Furthermore, the use of wider sheaths was not found to be associated with higher complications rate.

Introduction: The association between increased body mass index (BMI) and prolonged operative time (OT) in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RLRP) has been suggested before. It is unclear, however, which RLRP step contributes to this finding. We aimed to assess the association between BMI and duration of RLRP steps. Patients and Methods: Records of patients who underwent RLRP between 2003 and 2009 were reviewed retrospectively. Demographics (including BMI) and OT were recorded. We reviewed total OT (incision to closure) and separate duration of sequential steps of RLRP: In room to incision (preparation), incision to robot docking (port-placement), docking to endopelvic fascia dissection end (retroperitoneal space development), dorsal vein complex (DVC) control, DVC-control end to prostate detachment (prostate dissection), vesicourethral anastomosis (anastomosis), and undocking time (undocking). We divided this cohort into BMI groups (<25, 25.0 to 29.9, 30.0 to 34.9, and ≥35) and compared their characteristics and OT. Results: A total of 555 patients were analyzed. OT was significantly different across BMI groups with medians of 159, 181, 178, and 191 minutes for BMI <25, 25 to 29.9, 30 to 34.9, and ≥35 kg/m², respectively (P = 0.002). For BMI <25, preparation and prostate dissection were significantly shorter. There was a correlation between higher BMI and longer time of prostate dissection with nerve-sparing technique (P = 0.016), but not with a non–nerve-sparing approach (P = 0.658). Higher BMI was associated with longer times of DVC-control and vesicourethral anastomosis (P = 0.048 and P = 0.035, respectively). Conclusions: Higher BMI is significantly associated with prolonged total OT for RLRP with specific steps (preparation, nerve-sparing dissection, DVC-control, anastomosis) responsible for this result. These data need to be considered when planning RLRP in the obese population.