Male sexual dysfunction is a series of conditions, most notably including erectile dysfunction (ED), Peyronie’s disease (PD), and premature ejaculation (PE), defined by impaired sexual functioning. The prevalence of male sexual dysfunction increases with age and is relatively high with greater than 50% of men aged 40 to 70 describing some degree of erectile dysfunction. Risk factors for male sexual dysfunction include age, diabetes mellitus (DM), cancer, stroke, hypertension, penile trauma, depression, anxiety, and disturbance in central serotonin neurotransmission and 5-HT postsynaptic receptor functioning. Sexual questionnaires including the International Index of Erectile Dysfunction, Sexual Health Inventory for Men, and the Premature Ejaculation Diagnostic Tool are useful in screening for these disorders. Focused history and physical can establish diagnoses. For a condition to be diagnosed as male sexual dysfunction, the patient or their partner must view their sexual functioning as impaired. Treatment of male sexual dysfunction is etiology dependent. For ED, first-line therapy is a phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor or mental health care for psychogenic ED. More complicated cases may be treated with injections, surgery, or shockwave therapy. PD is either treated with medications for pain management, collagenase clostridium histolyticum injection, corpoplasty, plication, or shockwave therapy. PE may be treated behaviorally or with SSRIs as first line medication.

Ketamine is a common medical anesthetic and analgesic but is becoming more widely used as a recreational drug. Significant side effects on the urinary tract are associated with frequent recreational ketamine use most notably ketamine-induced cystitis (KIC). Regular ketamine consumption has been shown to increase the risk of cystitis symptoms by 3- to 4-fold, and cessation of ketamine use is usually associated with improvement of symptoms. Common KIC-related problems are urinary pain and discomfort, bladder epithelial barrier damage, reduced bladder storage and increased pressure, ureter stenosis, and kidney failure, all of which significantly impact patients’ quality of life. Furthermore, it becomes a vicious cycle when KIC patients attempt to manage their urinary pain with increased ketamine use. The precise pathophysiology of KIC is still unknown but several theories exist, most of which highlight the inflammatory signaling pathways leading to bladder epithelium damage due to presence of ketamine in the urine. Empirical treatment options for KIC are available and consist of ketamine cessation, noninvasive therapies, and surgery, and should be decided upon based on the time course and severity of the disease. Of note, cessation of use is strongly recommended for all KIC patients, and should be supplemented with motivational interviews and psychological and social support. It is crucial for clinicians to be familiar with KIC diagnosis and treatment, and to be prepared to have informed discussions with ketamine-using patients about the potential health consequences of ketamine.

Cubital Tunnel Syndrome (CuTS) is the compression of the ulnar nerve as it courses through the cubital tunnel near the elbow at the location colloquially referred to as the “funny bone”. CuTS is the most commonly diagnosed mononeuropathy after carpal tunnel syndrome. Cubital tunnel syndrome can manifest as numbness, tingling, or pain in the ring/small fingers and dorsoulnar hand. Repetitive pressure, stretching, flexion, or trauma of the elbow joint are known causes of CuTS. Chronic ulnar nerve compression and CuTS, when left untreated, can lead to atrophy of the first dorsal interosseus muscle and affect one’s quality of life to the point that they are no longer able to participate in daily activities involving fine motor function. It is estimated that up to 5.9% of the general population have had symptoms of CuTS. CuTS is underdiagnosed due to lack of seeking of treatment for symptoms. Compression or damage to the ulnar nerve is the main cause of symptoms experienced by an individual with CuTS. Repetitive elbow pressure or a history or elbow joint trauma or injury are additional known causes that can lead to CuTS. Common presentations of CuTS include paresthesia, clumsiness of the hand, hand atrophy and weakness. The earliest sign of CuTS is most commonly numbness and tingling of the ring and 5th finger. Older patients tend to present with motor symptoms of chronic onset; younger patients tend to have more acute symptoms. Pain and point tenderness at the medial elbow may also be seen. CuTS lacks universally agreed upon diagnostic and treatment algorithms. CuTS can be diagnosed by physical exam using Tinel’s sign, flexion-compression tests, palpating the ulnar nerve for thickening presence of local tenderness along the nerve. Ultrasound and nerve conduction studies may be used in combination with physical exam for diagnosis. Conservative treatment for CuTS is almost always pursued before surgical treatment and includes elbow splints, braces, and night-gliding exercises. Surgical treatment may be pursued in severe CuTS refractory to conservative treatment. Surgical options include open and endoscopic in-situ decompression, medial epicondylectomy, and anterior transposition of the ulnar nerve. CuTS is a prevalent disease that, if left untreated, can significantly alter an individual’s quality of life. Therefore, an accurate diagnosis and appropriate treatment is paramount in reducing further damage and preventing worsening or future symptoms.

The intention of utilizing chaperones during sensitive physical exams is to show respect to the patient, while simultaneously providing protection to both the patient and the medical provider. Despite clinical practice recommendations to offer chaperones for sensitive urologic exams, there is no data regarding the consistency of chaperone utilization. Our aim was to summarize the patient and provider perspectives on the role of chaperones in urology as well as identify barriers to implement chaperone consistency. In the present investigation, we conducted a systematic review of prospective, case-control, and retrospective studies and followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines for data reporting. Studies were identified from PubMed, MEDLINE, and PMC using the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms “chaperones, patient”, “chaperones, medical”, and keywords “chaperones”, and “urology”. Studies were included if they addressed patient/provider perspectives on chaperone utilization in urology specifically and were excluded if they investigated perspectives on chaperone utilization in other specialties. Preliminary study identification yielded 702 studies, 9 of which were eligible for this review after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of these, 4 studies focused on the patient perspective and 5 focused on the provider perspective. The percentage of patients that did not have a chaperone present during their urologic exam ranged from 52.9-88.5%. A greater proportion of these patients were male. Patients (59%) prefer a family member compared to a staff member as a chaperone. Physicians (60%) prefer staff member chaperones compared to family members. One study reported that 25.6% of patients did not feel comfortable to ask for a chaperone if they were not offered one. Two studies reported the percentage of patients who believed chaperones should be offered to all urology patients, ranging from 73-88.4%. Three studies reported the use of chaperones in the clinic which ranged from 5-72.5%. Two studies reported chaperone utilization documentation, ranging between 16-21.3%. Two studies reported the likelihood of chaperone utilization depending on gender of the physician, showing that male physicians were more likely to utilize chaperones and were 3x more likely to offer chaperones to their patients compared to female physicians. Research suggests that there are differing perspectives between patients and physicians regarding the specific role and benefits chaperones offer during a sensitive urologic examination, as well as differences in preferences of who should perform the role of the chaperone. While more work needs to be done to bridge the divide between clinical practice and patient/physician preferences, the act of offering chaperones to urologic patients, regardless if they want to utilize a chaperone for their examination is respectful of patient privacy and decision making.

We report our single-institution stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) experience on stage I renal cancer with prospectively collected toxicity and efficacy data. Methods and Materials: A total of 21 patients with solitary renal tumors, including 14 surgical candidates who refused surgery (66%), were treated with SBRT. Histologic confirmation was obtained on all patients before treatment; 2 had transitional cell carcinoma and 19 had renal cell carcinoma. The median age was 71 years (range, 58-88). Nearly all patients received 48 Gy in 3 fractions. Results: The median follow-up was 78 months (range, 5-107). At 5 years post treatment, the local tumor control rate was 100%. Tumor size decreased by a median value of 5.3% at 1 year post treatment, 15.6% at 2 years post treatment, and 15.4% at 5 years post treatment. Glomerular filtration rate had decreased by a median value of 1.5% at 1 year post treatment, 7.0% at 2 years post treatment, and 14.2% at 5 years post treatment. Three patients experienced grade 1 toxicity; no other treatment-related adverse effects were reported. Conclusions: SBRT is a promising noninvasive treatment in the management of primary renal cell carcinoma, with evolving clinical evidence demonstrating encouraging results with respect to local control and toxicity.