Purpose COVID-19 pandemic represents a novel challenge for healthcare systems, and it affects even the daily urological practice. Italy was the first country after China to experience a lock-down period. Our objective is to determine whether, during the COVID-19 period, there has been any modification in urological emergencies. Methods we retrospectively reviewed urgent urological consultations requested by the Emergency Department (ED) of Padua University Hospital in the 36-day period between February 22nd and March 30th, 2020 and compared them to the prior year cases within a similar time frame (February 24th to March 31st, 2019). Pediatric population (age < 15 years); surgical complications and traumas were excluded to avoid confounding from the reduction of activities during the lockdown. The number of daily consultations, the number of invasive procedures performed and admissions were evaluated, together with the predictors of admission were identified through multivariate logistic regression models. Results The final sample resulted in 107 consultations performed in 2020 and 266 in 2019. A higher number of daily consultations was performed during 2019 (7.33 vs 2.97, p < 0.001). Similarly, the number of daily-invasive procedures was higher in 2019 (p = 0.006), while there was no difference in the number of daily admissions (15 vs 12, p = 0.80). On multivariate analysis, the year (2020 vs 2019, OR 2.714, 95% CI 1.096–6.757, p = 0.0297) was a significant predictor of admission. Conclusions Urgent urology practice was affected during COVID-19 pandemic with a remarkable reduction in urgent urological consultations; furthermore, a higher risk of admissions was observed in 2020. The consequences of a potentially delayed diagnosis remain to be determined.

Decision-making in urologic oncology involves integrating multiple clinical data to provide an answer to the needs of a single patient. Although the practice of medicine has always been an “art” involving experience, clinical data, scientific evidence and judgment, the creation of specialties and subspecialties has multiplied the challenges faced every day by physicians. In the last decades, with the field of urologic oncology becoming more and more complex, there has been a rise in tools capable of compounding several pieces of information and supporting clinical judgment and experience when approaching a difficult decision. The vast majority of these tools provide a risk of a certain event based on various information integrated in a mathematical model. Specifically, most decision-making tools in the field of urologic focus on the preoperative or postoperative phase and provide a prognostic or predictive risk assessment based on the available clinical and pathological data. More recently, imaging and genomic features started to be incorporated in these models in order to improve their accuracy. Genomic classifiers, look-up tables, regression trees, risk-stratification tools and nomograms are all examples of this effort. Nomograms are by far the most frequently used in clinical practice, but are also among the most controversial of these tools. This critical, narrative review will focus on the use, diffusion and limitations of nomograms in the field of urologic oncology.

Lymph node dissection (LND; PLND: pelvic LND) is an essential component of radical cystectomy (RC) for bladder cancer (BC). However, the optimal anatomical extent of LND and its potential therapeutic role are still controversial: as we will explain, the extent of LND dissection is a predictor of survival and local recurrence but what is an adequate extension is still unclear. Moreover, there is large uncertainty about the role of surgery in patients with clinically-positive nodes. In this review we will provide a synthesis of the available evidence on this highly debated topic. Overall, the studies presented in this work support the idea that extended lymphadenectomy could provide optimal diagnostic and possibly therapeutic results in cN- patients. In cN+ patients, post chemotherapy surgery may be considered especially in subjects who have a good response to CHT, although definitive evidence is still needed. Finally, the final results of randomized trials are eagerly awaited to draw definitive conclusions of the role of PLND in BC.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in immediate effects on urological practice, in particular the vast reduction in elective surgeries. These changes are likely to have long-term effects for both patients and for urologists, which will persist even after the pandemic resolves. The many facets of COVID-19’s effects on urology remain to be seen, but they might also offer opportunities to reassess and improve patient management in urology and beyond.

Purpose: Pelvic lymph node dissection is an important step during robotic radical prostatectomy. The collection of lymphatic fluid (lymphocele) is the most common complication with potentially severe impact; therefore, different strategies have been proposed to reduce its incidence. Materials and Methods: In this systematic review, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and NIH Registry of Clinical Trials were searched for articles including the following interventions: transperitoneal vs extraperitoneal approach, any reconfiguration of the peritoneum, the use of pelvic drains, and the use of different sealing techniques and sealing agents. The outcome evaluated was the incidence of symptomatic lymphocele. Randomized, nonrandomized, and/or retrospective studies were included. Results: Twelve studies were included (including one ongoing randomized clinical trial). Because of heterogeneity of included studies, no meta-analysis was performed. No significant impact was reported by different sealing techniques and agents or by surgical approach. Three retrospective, nonrandomized studies showed a potential benefit of peritoneal reconfiguration to maximize the peritoneal surface of reabsorption. Conclusion: Lymphocele formation is a multistep and multifactorial event; high-quality literature analyzing risk factors and preventive measures is rather scarce. Peritoneal reconfiguration could represent a reasonable option that deserves further evaluation; no other preventive measure is supported by current evidence.