Purpose: To determine the effect of washing the biopsy needle with povidone-iodine solution on infection rates after transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy. Patients and Methods: 180 patients with transrectal prostate biopsy were included. Infection was excluded with midstream urine culture before biopsy, and patients were divided into two groups. In group 1 (n = 84), the needle was washed with povidone-iodine after each material reception during biopsy, and in group 2 (n = 96), it was not. At day 3 and 2 weeks after the biopsy, patients were checked. On day 3, midstream urine was cultured and patients were checked for fever, hematuria, rectal hemorrhagia, hematospermia and urinary retention. Also, the effect of rectal preparation on infection rate was evaluated. Results: There was no significant difference between the patients’ ages, PSA levels and prostate volumes. In total, 11 patients (6.1%; 4 from group 1 and 7 from group 2) developed infectious complications. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups. Fever, asymptomatic bacteriuria and urinary system infection rates were also not statistically different between the groups. The most frequent complication was hematuria with 83 cases (46.1%), but they did not need hospitalization and no patient had acute urinary obstruction. Conclusions: Washing the biopsy needle with povidone-iodine did not have an effect on the infection rates. Antibiotic prophylaxis and cleaning the biopsy equipment is adequate for low infection rates.

Qmax and Qave values were significantly higher in the sitting position. Alpha blockers did not affect any change.

We recommend SWL as the first choice for treatment of stones <200 mm2 in the upper and middle calices. Extracorporeal lithotripsy is one of the options for lower-caliceal stones <200 mm2 but has high re-treatment and auxiliary-procedure rates in these cases.

Introduction:We assessed the effect of different voiding positions on uroflowmetric parameters and post-void residual (PVR) urine volume in symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) patients. We also evaluated the effect of alpha blockers on PVR in different voiding positions. Methods:The study was performed with 110 BPH patients over 50 years old. In total, 4 uroflowmetries were performed in all patients: 2 patients in the sitting position and 2 in the standing position. PVR was measured with transabdominal ultrasonography. Also, patients were divided into two groups according to the alpha adrenergic blocker treatment; the effect of this treatment on their uroflowmetric parameters in different positions was evaluated. Results: Maximum flow rate (Qmax) and average flow rate (Qave) were significantly higher in patients in the sitting position, but there were no differences in other uroflowmetric parameters and PVR volume (Qmax: 15.5±5.9 mL/s vs. 13.7±5.2 mL/s, Qave: 11.4±4.6 mL/s vs. 10.7± 3.9 mL/s, respectively; p < 0.05). The Qmax and Qave were significantly higher in sitting position, compared to the standing position, in both alpha adrenergic treatment and non-treated groups; again, there were no differences in other uroflowmetric parameters and PVR volume. Conclusion: Qmax and Qave values were significantly higher in the sitting position. Alpha blockers did not affect any change.

ESWL outcomes for the ureteral calculi support the use of lithotripsy particularly for stones <100 mm(2). Treatment efficacy was not significantly different among stones localized in proximal and distal ureters. Degree of obstruction did not affect the ESWL outcomes in the proximal ureter, but it adversely affected SFR in the distal ureter.