Thomas Hughes

Dr. Thomas Hughes

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

7Years (2020-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 January 2020 in Urology Research and Practice
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
THThomas Hughes
Thomas Hughes
HHHui Ching Ho
Hui Ching Ho
Amelia PietropaoloAmelia Pietropaolo
Amelia Pietropaolo
BSBhaskar K Somani
Bhaskar K Somani
Urological organizations publish detailed evidence-based guidelines to support the urologists in the management of urolithiasis. Our objective was to provide clear guidance on the management of urolithiasis, compare the American Urological Association (AUA) and European Association of Urologists (EAU) guidelines, and present an algorithm for different clinical scenarios. The latest AUA and EAU guidelines on urolithiasis were evaluated for the level of evidence and grade of recommendation. All recommendations on management of urolithiasis (surgical and medical management) were reviewed and included. Both the organizations provide guidance for initial patient assessment, imaging requirements, and therapeutic options, including surgical intervention and medical therapy. In addition, these guidelines provide advice for managing specific patient groups, including pediatric patients and pregnant patients. Although there is a general concordance between both the groups, differences exist particularly for recommended modality of surgical intervention depending on stone location and size. Although both the guidelines were broadly similar, we also highlighted the variations in the level of evidence and grade of recommendation. Although these guidelines provide a valuable evidence-based framework to support the management of urinary tract stones, their implementation must be tailored to individual patient needs and available resources. Cite this article as: Hughes T, Ho HC, Pietropaolo A, Somani BK. Guideline of guidelines for kidney and bladder stones. Turk J Urol 2020; 46(Supp. 1): S104-S112.

15 March 2023 in Journal of Clinical Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
THThomas Hughes
Thomas Hughes
BRBhavan Prasad Rai
Bhavan Prasad Rai
SMSanjeev Madaan
Sanjeev Madaan
ECEdmund Chedgy
Edmund Chedgy
BSBhaskar K Somani
Bhaskar K Somani
Robot-assisted surgical systems (RASS) have revolutionised the management of many urological conditions over the last two decades with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) now being considered by many to be the preferred surgical approach. Intuitive Surgical has dominated the market during this time period with successive iterations of the da Vinci model. The expiration of patents has opened the RASS market and several new contenders have become available or are currently in development. This comprehensive narrative review aims to explore the merits of each robotic system as well as the evidence and barriers to their use. The newly developed RASS have increased the versality of robotic surgical systems to a wider range of settings through advancement in technology. The increased competition may result in an overall reduction in cost, broadening the accessibility of RASS. Learning curves and training remain a barrier to their use, but the situation appears to be improving through dedicated training programmes. Outcomes for RARP have been well investigated and tend to support improved early functional outcomes. Overall, the rapid developments in the field of robot-assisted surgery indicate the beginning of a promising new era to further enhance urological surgery.

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Amelia PietropaoloAmelia Pietropaolo
Amelia Pietropaolo
THThomas Hughes
Thomas Hughes
MSMriganka Mani Sinha
Mriganka Mani Sinha
BSBhaskar K Somani
Bhaskar K Somani
Background: For ureteroscopy and laser stone fragmentation (URSL), the use of laser technology has shifted from low power to higher power lasers and the addition of Moses technology, that allows for ‘fragmentation, dusting and pop-dusting’ of stones. We wanted to compare the outcomes of URSL for Moses technology 60 W laser system versus matched regular Holmium 20 W laser cases. Methods: Prospective data were collected for patients who underwent URSL using a Moses 60 W laser (Group A) and matched to historical control data using a regular Holmium 20 W laser (Group B), performed by a single surgeon. Data were collected for patient demographics, stone location, size, pre- and post-operative stent, operative time, length of stay, complications and stone free rate (SFR). Results: A total of 38 patients in each group underwent the URSL procedure. The stones were matched for their location (17 renal and 11 ureteric stones). The mean single and cumulative stone sizes (mm) were 10.9 ± 4.4 and 15.5 ± 9.9, and 11.8 ± 4.0 and 16.5 ± 11.3 for groups A and B, respectively. The mean operative time (min) was 51.6 ± 17.1 and 82.1 ± 27.0 (p ≤ 0.0001) for groups A and B. The initial SFR was 97.3% and 81.6% for groups A and B, respectively (p = 0.05), with 1 and 7 patients in each group needing a second procedure (p = 0.05), for a final SFR of 100% and 97.3%. While there were 2 and 5 Clavien I/II complications for groups A and B, none of the patients in group A had any infection related complication. Conclusions: Use of Moses technology with higher power was significantly faster for stone lithotripsy and reduced operative time and the number of patients who needed a second procedure to achieve a stone free status. It seems that the use of Moses technology with a mid-power laser is likely to set a new benchmark for treating complex stones, without the need for secondary procedures in most patients.

1 April 2023 in Research and Reports in Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
LTLazaros Tzelves
Lazaros Tzelves
RGRobert Geraghty
Robert Geraghty
THThomas Hughes
Thomas Hughes
PJPatrick Juliebø-Jones
Patrick Juliebø-Jones
BSBhaskar K Somani
Bhaskar K Somani
Urolithiasis is a common clinical condition, and surgical treatment is performed with different minimally invasive procedures, such as ureteroscopy, shockwave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Although the transition from open surgery to endourological procedures to treat this condition has been a paradigm shift, ongoing technological advancements have permitted further improvement of clinical outcomes with the development of modern equipment. Such innovations in kidney stone removal are new lasers, modern ureteroscopes, development of applications and training systems utilizing three-dimensional models, artificial intelligence and virtual reality, implementation of robotic systems, sheaths connected to vacuum devices and new types of lithotripters. Innovations in kidney stone removal have led to an exciting new era of endourological options for patients and clinicians alike.

1 January 2024 in Therapeutic Advances in Infectious Disease
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
DBDaniel Bowen
Daniel Bowen
THThomas Hughes
Thomas Hughes
PJPatrick Juliebø-Jones
Patrick Juliebø-Jones
BSBhaskar K Somani
Bhaskar K Somani
This article aims to provide a practical guide for patient management and an overview of the predictive scorings for Fournier’s gangrene (FG) that are available to aid clinicians. A literature was performed reviewing currently used scoring systems for FG and presenting a practical guide for its management based on the available evidence. There are four specific scoring systems available for the assessment of FG although few other non-specific and generic tools also exist. These specific tools include Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis, Fournier’s Gangrene Severity Index, Uludag Fournier’s Gangrene Severity Index, and Simplified Fournier’s Gangrene Severity Index and help calculate expected mortality. Our proposed algorithm covers primary assessment, resuscitative interventions, initial investigations, urgent care, post-operative care, and long-term follow-up. The management of the FG patient can be divided into initial resuscitation, surgical debridement, ongoing ward management with antibiotic therapy, wound reconstruction, and long-term follow-up. Each facet of care is vital and requires multidisciplinary team expertise for optimal outcomes. Whilst mortality continues to improve, it remains significant, reflecting the severe and life-threatening nature of FG. More research is certainly needed into how this care is individualised, and to ensure that long-term outcomes in FG include quality of life measures after discharge.

18 October 2023 in Life
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
THThomas Hughes
Thomas Hughes
PHPhilip Harper
Philip Harper
BSBhaskar K Somani
Bhaskar K Somani
The management of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) should involve a treatment algorithm that takes into account prostate size, and patient’s symptoms and preference with the aim of helping with urinary symptoms and enhance quality of life. The diagnostic assessment for men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) should be comprehensive to help choose the best management strategy. Strategies from lifestyle modifications to medical treatment with alpha blockers and/or 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors to surgical procedures can all be used in the management algorithm. Surgical management ranges from transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) to minimally invasive surgical therapies (MIST) including laser therapies such as Holmium laser enucleation (HoLEP) and photoselective vaporisation (PVP), aquablation, Rezūm system, prostate artery embolisation (PAE), prostatic urethral lift (PUL), temporary implantable nitinol device (iTind) and Optilume BPH catheter system. BPO is a common urological condition that has a significant impact on quality of life and economic burden globally and is likely to become increasingly prevalent with an ageing population. Selecting the most appropriate treatment modality will depend on the individual patient preferences, availability of resources, cost, anatomical factors and the goals of treatment.