-
Journal of Endourology May 2021To compare outcomes of monopolar bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in the management of exclusively moderate-large volume prostatic hyperplasia in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Safety and Efficacy of Bipolar Transurethral Resection of the Prostate Monopolar Transurethral Resection of Prostate in the Treatment of Moderate-Large Volume Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
To compare outcomes of monopolar bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in the management of exclusively moderate-large volume prostatic hyperplasia in terms of maximum flow rate as a surrogate for clinical efficacy, duration of catheterization, hospital stay, operative time, resection weight, transurethral resection (TUR) syndrome, acute urinary retention (AUR), clot retention, and blood transfusion. We conducted a search of electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL), identifying studies comparing the outcomes of monopolar and bipolar TURP in the management of large-volume prostatic hyperplasia. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies were used to assess included studies. Random effects modeling was used to calculate pooled outcome data. Three RCTs and four observational studies were identified, enrolling 496 patients. No difference was observed in the clinical efficacy between each procedure at 3 months postoperatively ( = 0.99), 6 months ( = 0.46), and 12 months ( = 0.29). The use of bipolar TURP was associated with significantly shorter inpatient stay ( = 0.01) and a shorter duration of catheterization ( = 0.05). Monopolar TURP was associated with an increased risk of TUR syndrome ( = 0.03). Operative time ( = 0.58), resection weight ( = 0.16), AUR ( = 0.96), clot retention ( = 0.79), and blood transfusion ( = 0.39) were similar in both groups. Our meta-analysis demonstrated that bipolar TURP in the treatment of moderate-large volume prostatic disease may be associated with a significantly lower rate of TUR syndrome and shortened length of hospital stay, with similar efficacy when compared with monopolar TURP. Further high-quality RCTs with adequate sample sizes are required to compare both monopolar and bipolar TURP to open prostatectomy or laser enucleation in the treatment of exclusively large-volume prostates with stricter definition of size.
Topics: Humans; Male; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Transurethral Resection of Prostate; Treatment Outcome; Urologic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 33198500
DOI: 10.1089/end.2020.0840 -
European Radiology Jul 2021To investigate the efficacy and safety of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) vs. transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in patients affected by benign prostatic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the efficacy and safety of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) vs. transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in patients affected by benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). We also reviewed mean changes from baseline in PAE at selected follow-up points.
METHODS
PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase were searched up to May 1, 2020. Randomized controlled trials on PAE were collected according to specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3, STATA 14, and GraphPad Prism 8. Pooled patient-reported scores and functional outcomes were calculated by using a fixed or random-effect model.
RESULTS
Eleven articles met our selection criteria and ten independent patient series were included in the final analysis. Pooled estimates suggested no significant difference between TURP and PAE for patient-reported outcomes including International Prostate Symptom Score (2.32 (- 0.44 to 5.09)) and quality of life (0.18 (- 0.41 to 0.77)) at 12 months. PAE was less effective regarding improvements in most functional outcomes such as maximum flow rate, prostate volume, and prostate-specific antigen. Moreover, PAE may be associated with relatively fewer complications, lower cost, and shorter hospitalization. After the PAE procedure, the overall weighted mean differences for all outcomes except sexual health scores were significantly improved from baseline during follow-up to 24 months.
CONCLUSION
PAE is non-inferior to TURP with regard to improving patient-reported outcomes, though most functional parameters undergo more changes after TURP than after PAE. Moreover, PAE can significantly continue to relieve symptoms for 24 months without causing serious complications.
KEY POINTS
• PAE is as effective as TURP in improving subjective symptom scores, with fewer complications and shorter hospitalization times. • PAE is inferior to TURP in the improvement of most functional outcomes. • Improvements due to PAE are durable during follow-up to 24 months.
Topics: Arteries; Embolization, Therapeutic; Humans; Male; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Transurethral Resection of Prostate; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33449181
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-020-07663-2 -
Actas Urologicas Espanolas 2020Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) could have better outcomes with decreased complication rates if compared to traditional techniques (transurethral...
BACKGROUND
Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) could have better outcomes with decreased complication rates if compared to traditional techniques (transurethral resection and open prostatectomy) for the surgical relief of bladder outlet obstruction. Despite this, its use has not been implemented in the urology community, probably due to the high complication rates of the HoLEP learning curve (HoLC).
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review of the complication rates in HoLC and compare these with those of traditional techniques.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
a systematic literature search was performed in MedLine and Embase using the search terms «HoLEP» and «holmium laser enucleation». We identified 680 records and selected 15 studies following PRISMA criteria.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
1705 cases in the learning curves of 59 surgeons were analyzed. Most of the studies do not report complications in a standardized way. Intraoperative complication rates are low and usually without long-term impact. Postoperative complication rates are limited and show improvement with practice. The complication rates in the HoLC are similar or lower to those reported by traditional techniques.
CONCLUSION
Complication rates in HoLC are not higher than those reported by traditional techniques. HoLEP learning should not be delayed for fear of increasing complications or their severity.
Topics: Humans; Lasers, Solid-State; Learning Curve; Male; Postoperative Complications; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Treatment Outcome; Urinary Bladder Neck Obstruction
PubMed: 31822354
DOI: 10.1016/j.acuro.2019.08.008 -
Journal of Robotic Surgery Jun 2024Even though robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP) is superior to open surgery in reducing postoperative complications, 6-20% of patients still... (Review)
Review
Even though robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP) is superior to open surgery in reducing postoperative complications, 6-20% of patients still experience urinary incontinence (UI) after surgery. Therefore, many researchers have established predictive models for UI occurrence after RARP, but the predictive performance of these models is inconsistent. This study aims to systematically review and critically evaluate the published prediction models of UI risk for patients after RARP. We conducted a comprehensive literature search in the databases of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase. Literature published from inception to March 20, 2024, which reported the development and/or validation of clinical prediction models for the occurrence of UI after RARP. We identified seven studies with eight models that met our inclusion criteria. Most of the studies used logistic regression models to predict the occurrence of UI after RARP. The most common predictors included age, body mass index, and nerve sparing procedure. The model performance ranged from poor to good, with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves ranging from 0.64 to 0.98 in studies. All the studies have a high risk of bias. Despite their potential for predicting UI after RARP, clinical prediction models are restricted by their limited accuracy and high risk of bias. In the future, the study design should be improved, the potential predictors should be considered from larger and representative samples comprehensively, and high-quality risk prediction models should be established. And externally validating models performance to enhance their clinical accuracy and applicability.
Topics: Humans; Prostatectomy; Urinary Incontinence; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Male; Laparoscopy; Postoperative Complications; ROC Curve; Body Mass Index
PubMed: 38869689
DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-02009-2 -
BMJ Open Aug 2019To assess the efficacy and safety of green-light laser photoselective vaporisation of the prostate (PVP) compared with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Comparison of photoselective green light laser vaporisation versus traditional transurethral resection for benign prostate hyperplasia: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and prospective studies.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the efficacy and safety of green-light laser photoselective vaporisation of the prostate (PVP) compared with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis, conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library until October 2018.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials and prospective studies comparing the safety and efficacy of PVP versus TURP for LUTS manifesting through BPH.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Perioperative parameters, complications rates and functional outcomes including treatment-related adverse events such as International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual (PVR), quality of life (QoL) and International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF).
RESULTS
22 publications consisting of 2665 patients were analysed. Pooled analysis revealed PVP is associated with reduced blood loss, transfusion, clot retention, TUR syndrome, capsular perforation, catheterisation time and hospitalisation, but also with a higher reintervention rate and longer intervention duration (all p<0.05). No significant difference in IPSS, Qmax, QoL, PVR or IIEF at 3, 24, 36 or 60 months was identified. There was a significant difference in QoL at 6 months (MD=-0.08; 95% CI -0.13 to -0.02; p=0.007), and IPSS (MD = -0.10; 95% CI -0.15 to -0.05; p<0.0001) and Qmax (MD=0.62; 95% CI 0.06 to 1.19; p=0.03) at 12 months, although these differences were not clinically relevant.
CONCLUSION
PVP is an effective alternative, holding additional safety benefits. PVP has equivalent long-term IPSS, Qmax, QoL, PVR, IIEF efficacy and fewer complications. The main drawbacks are dysuria and reintervention, although both can be managed with non-invasive techniques. The additional shortcoming is that PVP does not acquire histological tissue examination which removes an opportunity to identify prostate cancer.
Topics: Color; Erectile Dysfunction; Humans; Laser Therapy; Male; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Prostatism; Quality of Health Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Transurethral Resection of Prostate
PubMed: 31439603
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028855 -
European Urology Open Science Sep 2022Erectile dysfunction (ED) following radical prostatectomy is a concern for patients and their partners. Low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy (LI-ESWT) can... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
Erectile dysfunction (ED) following radical prostatectomy is a concern for patients and their partners. Low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy (LI-ESWT) can potentially enhance tissue repair and regeneration. The aim of the current study was to systematically review the literature to assess the role of LI-ESWT in the management of patients with postprostatectomy ED.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Two authors independently performed a systematic search of the PubMed and Web of Science databases to identify all relevant articles. Non-English reports, case reports, reviews, letters, and editorials were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed according to the GRADE guidelines.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Nine articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the qualitative analysis. All the studies included were published between 2015 and 2022 and the majority of them compared phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5Is) alone versus a combination of LI-ESWT and PDE5Is. Only three studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In general, there is no standardized protocol for LI-ESWT for postprostatectomy ED. In comparisons of LI-ESWT + PDE5Is versus PDE5Is alone, some authors found a statistically significant improvement in erectile function with LI-ESWT + PDE5Is. The starting time for LI-ESWT differed among the studies, ranging from 3 d to 6 mo after surgery. The main limitations of the review are the scarcity of studies, small sample sizes, high risk of bias, and high heterogeneity among studies.
CONCLUSIONS
There is currently limited evidence on the use of LI-ESWT either alone or in combination with PDE5Is in penile rehabilitation protocols after prostatectomy. However, small clinical trials with short follow-up show that LI-ESWT could potentially play a role in the management of postprostatectomy ED in the future. Further RCTs with larger sample sizes are needed.
PATIENT SUMMARY
Despite limited reports in the literature, low-intensity shockwave therapy after removal of the prostate is a promising noninvasive treatment for dealing with erectile dysfunction after surgery.
PubMed: 35928730
DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2022.07.003 -
Ontario Health Technology Assessment... 2021Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a noncancerous enlargement of the prostate that commonly affects older people with prostates and may lead to obstructive urinary...
BACKGROUND
Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a noncancerous enlargement of the prostate that commonly affects older people with prostates and may lead to obstructive urinary symptoms. Symptoms may initially be mild but tend to worsen over time. Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) is an endovascular procedure to treat BPH, wherein an interventional radiologist inserts a catheter into the patient to inject tiny particles intended to reduce blood flow to the enlarged prostate, causing it to shrink in size. We conducted a health technology assessment on PAE for people with BPH, which included an evaluation of effectiveness, safety, cost-effectiveness, the budget impact of publicly funding PAE, and patient preferences and values.
METHODS
We performed a systematic literature search of the clinical evidence. We assessed the risk of bias of each included study using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for observational studies. We assessed the quality of the body of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria. We performed a systematic review of the economic literature. We then assessed the cost-effectiveness of PAE compared with alternative treatments (i.e., transurethral resection of the prostate [TURP] or open simple prostatectomy [OSP]) using a Markov microsimulation model. The analysis was conducted from the Ontario Ministry of Health perspective over a time horizon of 6.5 years. We also analyzed the budget impact of publicly funding PAE in people with moderate to severe BPH in Ontario.
RESULTS
We included six studies in our systematic review. Four RCTs and one observational study compared PAE with TURP, and one observational study compared PAE with OSP. All studies had considerable risk-of-bias concerns. PAE may improve BPH symptoms and urodynamic measures, but we are uncertain whether PAE achieves better results than TURP (GRADE: Very low to Low). Compared with TURP, PAE may result in higher patient satisfaction and fewer adverse events (GRADE: Not assessed). Compared with OSP, PAE may result in smaller improvements in BPH symptoms and urodynamic measures and may lead to fewer adverse events, but the evidence is very uncertain (GRADE: Very low).We did not find any published cost-effectiveness studies in the economic literature review. Our primary economic evaluation showed that, compared with TURP, PAE has an incremental cost of $328 (95% CrI: -$686 to $1,423) and a very small incremental quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of 0.007 (95% CrI: -0.004 to 0.018). The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of PAE versus TURP is $44,930 per QALY gained. At the commonly used willingness-to-pay values of $50,000 and $100,000 per QALY, the cost-effectiveness of PAE is uncertain (52% and 68% probability, respectively, of being cost-effective compared with TURP). In a scenario analysis, we compared PAE with OSP for individuals with large prostates (who may be ineligible for TURP). We found that PAE is less costly (-$1,231; 95% CrI: -$2,457 to $69) and less effective (-0.12 QALYs; 95% CrI: -0.18 to -0.04). The resulting ICER of PAE versus OSP is $10,241 saved per QALY lost. At the commonly used willingness-to-pay value of $50,000 per QALY, PAE is unlikely to be cost-effective (2% probability of being cost-effective compared with OSP). Assuming a low uptake (i.e., an additional 10 to 50 procedures per year in years 1 to 5), we estimated that publicly funding PAE in Ontario would lead to an additional cost of about $11,400 over the next 5 years.People we spoke with who have lived experience with BPH reported on the negative impact it can have on their quality of life. Those who had received PAE reported a positive experience with the procedure and meaningful improvement in their symptoms.
CONCLUSIONS
Prostatic artery embolization may improve BPH symptoms and urodynamic measures, but we are uncertain if the procedure results in similar outcomes to those of TURP. Based on one observational study, PAE may result in smaller improvements compared with OSP, but we are very uncertain of the evidence. Compared with TURP and OSP, PAE may result in fewer adverse events. Longer-term comparative studies are needed to assess the durability and long-term adverse events of PAE, the potential need for reintervention after PAE, and how PAE compares with other available BPH treatment options.We found the cost-effectiveness of PAE compared with TURP to be uncertain. Also, PAE is unlikely to be cost-effective compared with OSP. If PAE is publicly funded in Ontario, the budget impact is estimated to be small over the next 5 years.People who have lived experience with BPH reported that PAE improves quality of life and reduces negative symptoms of BPH.
Topics: Aged; Humans; Male; Arteries; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Observational Studies as Topic; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Technology Assessment, Biomedical; Embolization, Therapeutic
PubMed: 34188733
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Robotic Surgery Feb 2023To assess the cost-effectiveness of the robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) compared to open radical prostatectomy (ORP) for localized prostate...
To assess the cost-effectiveness of the robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) compared to open radical prostatectomy (ORP) for localized prostate cancer from a healthcare perspective in Colombia. A systematic review was conducted in Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases, to identify relevant publications up to January 2020 to summarize clinical outcomes related to effectiveness of robot-assisted and open radical prostatectomy. A tree decision model was designed given the clinical outcomes and possibilities of complication and success. Outcomes were defined as complications according to Clavien - Dindo classification and success measured as urethral stricture rate. Cost was divided into two categories: surgical procedure and complications. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated and a deterministic sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of the uncertainty on the conclusions of the model. A 90-day horizon was defined. Direct medical costs associated with RALRP were $6.511 ($ 5.127- $8.138), and for ORP were $4.476 ($2.170-$ 6.511). The average cost for complication management was rated at $ 327 for RALRP and $ 382 for ORP, based on an augmented risk of post-operative urethral stricture in the ORP group (2.4% vs 10.8%). ICER was calculated in USD $18.987. The cost of RALRP has to be reduced to around USD 5.345 to achieve an ICER under 1 GDP making the intervention feasible. Using a 3 GDP per capita threshold, the implementation of RALRP could be cost-effective for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in emerging economies. Bolder measures including the use of one needle carrier, three robotic arms, and a shorten hospitalization program of 24 h, can save around $1000 for each patient, achieving the goal cost of $5345 needed for a favorable ICER.
Topics: Male; Humans; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Cost-Effectiveness Analysis; Urethral Stricture; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Neoplasms; Laparoscopy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35668314
DOI: 10.1007/s11701-022-01431-8 -
Translational Andrology and Urology Dec 2019The influence of a previous transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) on the outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP) is still controversial. Therefore, we performed...
BACKGROUND
The influence of a previous transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) on the outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP) is still controversial. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the perioperative, functional and oncological outcomes of RP with or without a previous TURP.
METHODS
We conducted a computerized literature search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library and included 15 retrospective studies evaluating RPs with or without a previous TURP in this meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Fifteen studies, including 6,840 cases, were analyzed. RP after a previous TURP were related to smaller prostate volumes (WMD: -6.93 cm; 95% CI, -10.89 to -2.97; P<0.001), lower preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels (WMD: -1.51; 95% CI, -2.49 to -0.53; P=0.002), longer operative times (WMD: 13.22 min; 95% CI, 4.55 to 21.89 min; P=0.003), more blood loss (WMD: 55.38 mL; 95% CI, 12.35 to 98.41 mL; P=0.01), higher overall complication rates (OR =1.98; 95% CI, 1.27 to 3.08; P=0.002), longer hospital stays (WMD: 1.16 days; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.67; P<0.001), longer duration of catheter (WMD: 0.60 days; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.64; P<0.001), higher positive surgical margin rates (OR =1.30; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.55; P=0.004), lower complete continence rates at 3 months (OR =0.67; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.81; P<0.001), 6 months (OR =0.52; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.88; P=0.01), 12 months (OR =0.59; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.74; P<0.001), and lower potency rates at 12 months (OR =0.62; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.77; P<0.001). Subgroup analysis indicated that open RP after previous TURP could achieve better outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
RP after a previous TURP leads to worse perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes. For these patients an open procedure is recommended. Due to the low number of studies and known biases, further large-scale studies are needed to support this result.
PubMed: 32038968
DOI: 10.21037/tau.2019.11.13 -
Arab Journal of Urology Nov 2020: To assess the prevalence of frailty, a status of vulnerability to stressors leading to adverse health events, in bladder cancer patients undergoing radical cystectomy... (Review)
Review
: To assess the prevalence of frailty, a status of vulnerability to stressors leading to adverse health events, in bladder cancer patients undergoing radical cystectomy (RC), and test the impact of frailty measurements on postoperative adverse outcomes. : A systematic review of English-language articles published up to April 2020 was performed. Electronic databases were searched to quantify the frailty prevalence in RC patients and assess the predictive ability of frailty indexes on RC-related outcomes as postoperative complications, early mortality, hospitalization length (LOS), costs, discharge dispositions, readmission rate. : Eleven studies were selected. Patients' frailty was identified by Johns Hopkins indicator (JHI) in two studies, 11-item modified Frailty Index (mFI) in four, 5-item simplified FI (sFI) in three, 15-point mFI in one, Fried Frailty Criteria in one. Considering all the frailty measurements applied, 8% and 31% of patients were frail or pre-frail, respectively. Frail (43%) and pre-frail patients (35%) were more at risk of major complications compared to non-frail (27%) using sFI; with JHI the percentages of frail and non-frail were 53% versus 19%. According to JHI and mFI frailty was related to longer LOS and higher costs. JHI identified that 3% of frail patients experience in-hospital mortality versus 1.5% of non-frail. Finally, using sFI, frail (28%), and pre-frail (19%) were more likely to be discharged non-home compared to non-frail patients (8%) and had a higher risk of 30-day mortality (4% and 2% versus 1%). : Almost half of RC patients were frail or pre-frail, conditions significantly related to an increased risk of postoperative adverse events with higher rates of major complications and early mortality. The most-used frailty index was mFI, while JHI and sFI resulted the most reliable to predict early postoperative RC-related adverse outcomes and should be routinely included in clinical practice after better standardization throughout prospective comparative studies. : ACG: Adjusted Clinical Groups; ACS: American College Surgeons; AUC: area under the curve; BCa: bladder cancer; CCI: Charlson Comorbidity Index; CSHA-FI: Canadian Study of Health and Aging Frailty Index; CCS: Clavien-Dindo Classification Score; ERAS: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery; FFC: Fried Frailty Criteria; (e)(m)(s)FI: (extended) (modified) (simplified) Frailty Index; ICU: intensive care unit; IQR: interquartile range; (p)LOS: (prolonged) length of hospital stay; NSQIP: National Surgical Quality Improvement Program; OR: odds ratio; (O)PN: (open) partial nephrectomy; PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses; (O)(RA)RC: (open)(robot-assisted) radical cystectomy; (O)RN: (open) radical nephrectomy; ROC: receiver operating characteristic; RNU: radical nephroureterectomy; (R)RP: (retropubic) radical prostatectomy; RR: relative risk; THCs: total hospital charges; nephrectomy; UD: urinary diversion.
PubMed: 33763244
DOI: 10.1080/2090598X.2020.1841538