Purpose Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most frequently diagnosed malignancies worldwide. Hormonal deprivation therapy is a well-established treatment for locally advanced or metastatic diseases but exposes patients to the risk of osteoporosis and fragility fractures. Furthermore, the tropism of the PCa cells to osseous metastases increases the incidence of skeletal-related events (SREs). Methods A nonsystematic review of the international literature was performed in respect to the use of osteoclast inhibitors zoledronic acid (ZA) and denosumab (DEN) in PCa patients. Results DEN and ZA have proved their efficacy in preventing osteoporosis and bone mass loss in patients treated with hormonal therapy with no proven superiority of one agent over the other. However, the effectiveness in reducing fragility fractures has been proved only for DEN so far. In metastatic-free castrate-sensitive high-risk PCa patients, ZA has not shown any efficacy in preventing osseous metastasis, and evidence is lacking in favor or against the use of DEN. The use of osteoclasts inhibitors had no evident positive effect in overall and disease-specific survival in this group of patients. In advanced castrate-refractory malignancy, DEN has shown clinical superiority over ZA in preventing new SRE but not in overall survival. Conclusion Superiority of DEN over ZA has been proved only in advanced castrate refractory disease in terms of preventing new SRE. In the rest of the cases, the selection of either agent should be based on the clinical condition of each patient and the cost of the treatment.

No abstract

Introduction: To present the incidence of bacterial colonization on ureteral double J stents (DJS); isolate the uropathogens; define the rate of multi-resistant bacteria strains (MRBS) and present their clinical importance. Materials and Methods: The whole body of 105 DJSs was examined for the presence of uropathogens. Results: The main etiology for stent placement was lithiasis (57.1%). The most frequently cultured microorganisms were staphylococcus (28.6%). Forty-four stents hosted MRBS. 25 (23.8%), 10 (9.5%) and 8 (7.6%) of the patients were affected by malignancy, diabetes mellitus and chronic renal failure respectively. Apart from the female gender, none of the examined factors (age, duration of stenting and chronic diseases) was correlated with the colonization or the presence of MRBS. Eleven of the 61 stented patients (18%) who were operated upon developed a febrile urinary tract infections (UTI). In 7 of them the stent hosted MRBS (63.6%). After taking into consideration the sensitivity report, we altered our initial empirical antibacterial prophylaxis to targeted antibacterial treatment in the patients with MRBS with rapid remission of their infection and no urosepsis event. Conclusion: The knowledge of bacteriologic flora of DJS can be very helpful in an evidence-based prophylactic and therapeutic practice. Stent examination could be recommended in high-risk cases of developing UTI and sepsis after a urologic operation.

Purpose: To present the results and complications of retrograde ureteroscopic lithotripsy for treatment of large ureteral stones. Methods: Nineteen patients were treated for ureteral stones ≥15 mm detected in CT or plain KUB film. Endoscopy was performed with either a semirigid or flexible ureteroscope. Stone fragmentation was performed using a 30 W Holmium laser. Results: The mean stone size was 20.7 mm (range 15–30). The mean duration of the operation was 82 min (45–140). Measures to prevent retropulsion of fragments into the kidney were not routinely applied. A subsequent RIRS during the same session was necessary in 2 cases. After a single procedure a stone free state was achieved in 15 cases (78.9%), while 4 others required a second session (ESWL or second ureterolithotripsy, 2 cases each). In only 1 patient, the stone-free state was not achieved after a 1.2 procedure per patient (overall success rate 94.7%). The mean duration of hospitalization was 1.9 days (range 1–5). Three patients experienced postoperative pyelonephritis and 2 others prolonged hematuria. Conclusion: Endoscopic lithotripsy is safe and effective in treating large ureteral stones. After a single endoscopic procedure, approximately 4 out of 5 patients are expected to become stone free. This rate increases to 95% with a second session of lithotripsy.

Treatment of large and multiple stones located in the ureter and/or the kidney may be challenging. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the results and complications of retrograde endoscopic lithotripsy for stones located in the urinary tract and to determine prognostic factors for treatment outcome. From April 2017 to March 2020, eligible patients for the active treatment of ureterolithiasis with or without concomitant nephrolithiasis <20 mm were enrolled in the study. The prognostic factors for the stone free rate (SFR) after the 1st and subsequent sessions and overall complications were assessed. Patients were divided into single or multiple lithiasis groups (groups A and B respectively). A comparison between these two groups was then conducted. Overall, 237 stones were detected in 155 patients, representing a mean burden of 1.53 stone per patient. The mean total stone size was 14.7 mm, the initial SFR was 80% and the final SFR (after a mean of 1.23 session per patient) was 94.2%. The rate of complications was 26.4%. Multivariative analysis revealed that preoperative stenting and total stone size were independent prognostic factors of initial SFR, while no independent factors were determined for final SFR. Age, total size and stones in the lower calyx were independent factors for complications. In group A and B, 114 and 41 cases with solitary and multiple stones were included, respectively. Excluding operation time (P= 0.002), no significant differences were recorded in terms of initial (P= 0.255) and final SFR (P= 0.056), hospital stay (P=0.308), mean number of treatments (P=0.757) and the rate of complications (P=0.218) between the two groups. In conclusion, retrograde endoscopic management of multiple lithiasis has a favorable outcome irrespective of stone location. Older patients with higher burdens and stones in the lower calyx should be treated with caution.