Given the importance of correctly staging renal cell carcinomas, specific guidelines should be in place for tumor size measurement. While a standard means of renal tumor measurement has not been established, intuitively, tumor size should be based on fresh measurements. We sought to assess the accuracy of postfixation and microscopic measurements of renal tumor size, as compared to fresh measurements and radiographic size. Thirty-four nephrectomy cases performed by a single surgeon were prospectively measured at different time points. The study cases included 23 clear cell renal cell carcinomas, 6 papillary renal cell carcinomas, and 5 other renal tumors. Radiologic tumors were 12.1% larger in diameter than fresh tumors (P<0.01). Furthermore, fresh specimens were 4.6% larger than formalin-fixed specimens (P<0.01), and postfixation measurements were 7.1% greater than microscopic measurements (P<0.01). The overall mean percentage of shrinkage between fresh and histological specimens was 11.4% (P<0.01). Histological processing would cause a tumor stage shift from pT1b to pT1a for two tumors in this study. The shrinkage effects of formalin fixation and histological processing may result in understaging of renal cell carcinomas. The shrinkage factor should be considered when reporting tumor size.

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Citation rates have been previously studied in the general medical literature and in a few subspecialties. The results of these studies have differed showing an association with citation rates and multiple study characteristics that include the design of the study, study topic, industry funding, the number of authors and institutions, newsworthiness, sample size, and journal prestige. Correlates with citation rates have never been studied within the field of urology, but are important as urology is a unique surgical discipline with complex disease processes and rapidly changing technology. Our study is the first to evaluate the factors associated with increased citation rates in the urological literature and will assist authors in improving the impact of their work in urology. To assess the factors associated with increased citation rates in the urological literature by reviewing articles published in the four major urological journals to help authors improve the impact of their work. A random sample of 200 original research articles published between January and June 2004 was analysed from The Journal of Urology, Urology, European Urology and BJU International. Study information was abstracted by two independent reviewers and citation counts within 4 years of publication were collected using Web of ScienceTM. Study characteristics and citation rates were analysed using median and interquartile ranges (IQRs), and logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate which factors predicted greater citation rates. The overall median number of citations per published article was 6.0 (IQR 3–12). After univariate analysis, we found that study design, study topic, continent of origin and sample size were associated with greater median citation rates. In a multivariate linear regression model, study design and study topic (oncology) predicted increased citation rates. Randomized controlled trials were cited a median of 13.5 times and were the strongest predictor of citation rates with an odds ratio of 115.5 (95% confidence interval 9.4–1419.6). Citation rates are associated with study design and study topic in the urological literature. Authors may improve the impact of their work by designing clinical studies with greater methodological safeguards against bias.

Purpose: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic affecting hospital systems and the availability of resources for surgical procedures. Our aim is to provide guidance for urologists to help prioritize urological cancer surgeries. Materials and Methods: We reviewed published literature on bladder cancer, upper tract urothelial carcinoma, penile cancer, testis cancer, prostate cancer, renal cancer and adrenal cancer. Results: For muscle invasive bladder cancer delays should be less than roughly 10 weeks and neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be considered. Patients with nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer should be counseled appropriately based on risk and intravesical therapies can continue. Upper tract urothelial carcinoma should also be treated with minimal delays for high risk patients, especially with ureteral tumors. Surgery for T1 renal cancers when indicated can be delayed until adequate resources are available. Patients with T2 renal cancer should be considered for early surgery if there are unfavorable preoperative characteristics. Higher stage renal tumors should be considered for early surgery. An early multidisciplinary approach is recommended for metastatic renal cancers. High risk prostate cancer may need preferential treatment and consideration of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy. Penile cancer can have worse sexual or oncologic outcomes with prolonged surgical delay. Likewise, adrenal cancer is aggressive and needs early surgical treatment. Testicular cancer should be treated in a timely manner with surgery or chemotherapy, as indicated. Conclusions: This review should further assist urologists in recognizing patients with potentially aggressive tumor biology that warrants early treatment.

Omission of cortical renorrhaphy appears feasible with no urine leaks or bleeding complications observed. The percent renal volume loss was improved by omission of cortical renorrhaphy. Reconstruction technique is important to control for when studying renal function after partial nephrectomy.

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer Early Detection provide recommendations for individuals with a prostate who opt to participate in an early detection program after receiving the appropriate counseling on the pros and cons. These NCCN Guidelines Insights provide a summary of recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines with regard to the testing protocol, use of multiparametric MRI, and management of negative biopsy results to optimize the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer and minimize the detection of indolent disease.