Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been continuing to affect the lives of all people globally. It has been shown that restrictions due to changes in lifestyles lead to mental health problems. This study aims to investigate the effect of COVID-19 pandemic on couples’ sexuality. A total of 245 volunteers (148 men and 97 women) were enrolled in the study. Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Patient Health Questionnaire, Perceived Stress Scale were administered to screen anxiety and depression symptoms. International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-15) and Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) along with self-constructed sexual behavior questionnaire were administered to participants, in order to evaluate sexual functions and behavioral changes during the pandemic. Sexual function scores (IIEF erectile function domain and total FSFI) during pandemic (24.55 ± 5.79 and 24.87 ± 7.88, respectively) were lower compared to the prepandemic period (26.59 ± 4.51 and 26.02 ± 6.22, respectively) ( p = 0.001 and p = 0.027, respectively). During pandemic compared to prepandemic period, the frequency of sexual intercourse decreased in men ( p = 0.001) and women ( p = 0.001) while sexual avoidance and solitary sexual approach behaviors (masturbation or watching sexual content videos, etc.) increased in men ( p = 0.001) and women ( p = 0.022). However, the couples that spent more time together during the pandemic reported better sexual function scores (men; p = 0.001, women; p = 0.006). Although this is the first study evaluating couples from Turkey with a convenience sample, further studies with a greater number may better elucidate the effects of this pandemic on sexuality.

The objective of this study was to audit the costs of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy (microperc) and compare them in terms of cost-effectiveness. We performed a retrospective analysis of 63 patients who underwent microperc and 48 patients who underwent RIRS. The cases, performed between first use and first repair, were used for this initial study. The costs associated with performing RIRS and microperc, including the costs of devices, disposables, hospitalization, and additional required treatments, were audited. The main perioperative and postoperative parameters were collected, including operation time, JJ stent requirements, used disposables, stone-free rates, and complications. Statistical analyses of the means of continuous variables were performed using Student's t test and the Mann-Whitney U test. Categorical variables were analyzed using Chi-squared tests. The mean cost of RIRS was $917.13 ± 73.62 and the mean cost of microperc was $831.58 ± 79.51; this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). The mean operation time of the RIRS group was significantly shorter than the microperc group (55.62 ± 19.62 min and 98.50 ± 29.64 min, respectively, p < 0.001). The assessment of required additional treatment showed that it was significantly higher in the RIRS group than the microperc group (p = 0.02). The stone-free rate for RIRS was 66.6 and 80.9 % for microperc; this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.12). In our series, the use of microperc is less expensive than RIRS due to additional required treatments and ancillary equipment in RIRS. RIRS is more effective than microperc in terms of operation time and more effective use of operation rooms.

No abstract

It seems that usage of laser lithotripsy (LL) in patients with ureteral stones is more effective than pneumatic lithotripsy (PL) in terms of operation time and SF rate. On the other hand, the mean cost of LL seems to be more expensive than PL. Urologists should think these parameters before the choice of these two treatment modalities. The higher the effectiveness, the greater the cost.

IntroductionExtracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) remains the preferred least invasive treatment for urinary tract stones. The main purpose of this study was to compare two treatment modalities for pain control during the ESWL procedure.Material and methodsFrom 2013 to 2014, 220 patients received ESWL for kidney stones. Before the procedure, the weight and height were measured to determine the body mass index (BMI); in addition, oxygen saturation and the pulse of the patients, as well as pain level were determined. The pain control provided included two different methods: diclofenac sodium plus hyoscine-N-butyl bromide in the first group and pethidine plus diazepam in the second group. The pain level of the patients was determined using two different scales: the Wong-Baker and the Visual Analogue scales (VAS). At the end of three sessions, all patients were evaluated for the stone fragmentation rate by plain abdominal X-ray, and the findings were recorded and analyzed.ResultsA total of 220 patients were enrolled in this study. There were 91 patients in the first group (diclofenac sodium + hyoscine-N-butyl bromide) (male/female: 63/28) and 129 (male/female: 83/46) patients in the second group (pethidine HCL +diazepam). The mean age with SD according to each group was 42.03 (±16.43) and 42.56 (±14.23), respectively (p = 0.8). With regard to pain scores (using the Wong-Baker and VAS scales), the responses were significantly lower in the second group (p <0.001).ConclusionsPethidine in combination with diazepam was superior to diclofenac and Hyoscine-N-butyl bromide for pain in patients undergoing ESWL.