Jaeger, Christopher D

Abstract Objectives: Hemostatic clip migration into the lower urinary tract is a potential complication of radical prostatectomy that may cause symptoms, anxiety, and functional concern. Our objective was to evaluate initial presentation, endoscopic management, and outcomes of patients with hemostatic clip migration following radical prostatectomy. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively identified all patients with hemostatic clip migration at our institution from 1977 to 2012. Patient records were then reviewed to identify causative factors, presentation, and long-term functional outcomes. Results: Seventeen patients were identified with clip migration following radical prostatectomy. Eight (47%) patients had undergone open retropubic radical prostatectomy, and 9 (53%) had received robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Hemostatic clip migration was diagnosed at a median of 8 (range, 1–252) months after prostatectomy. The majority of patients ( n = 16, 94%) were symptomatic upon the diagnosis of clip migration. Symptoms included irritative urinary symptoms ( n = 14, 82%), perineal pain ( n = 3, 18%), hematuria ( n = 2, 12%), and infection ( n = 2, 12%). Five (29%) had concomitant bladder neck contracture. Fifteen (88%) underwent successful endoscopic clip removal, whereas 2 (13%) patients required a repeat operation for recurrent clip erosion. With a median follow-up of 1.6 years, the majority ( n = 13, 87%) had complete symptom resolution after clip removal, although 2 patients had recurrent bladder neck contracture. Conclusions: Hemostatic clip migration after prostatectomy is often symptomatic with irritative voiding complaints, perineal pain, hematuria, infection, or bladder neck contracture. Fortunately, clips can be removed endoscopically with expected symptom resolution in the vast majority of patients.

Lymphoma may affect the ureter in cases of retroperitoneal involvement. We present a case of an adolescent male found to have non-Hodgkin lymphoma initially presenting as ureteral stricture evident on imaging. He was treated and responded to multiagent chemotherapy with resolution of both the lymphoma and the ureteral stricture. Although rare, non-Hodgkin lymphoma should be included in the differential diagnosis of pediatric patients with noncalculous, idiopathic ureteral strictures.

Objectives To evaluate short‐term outcomes of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate ( HoLEP ) and photoselective vaporisation of the prostate ( PVP ) in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and chronic urinary retention ( CUR ). Patients and Methods A retrospective chart review was performed of all patients with CUR who underwent HoLEP or PVP at our institution over a 3‐year period. CUR was defined as a persistent post‐void residual urine volume ( PVR ) of >300 mL or refractory urinary retention requiring catheterisation. Results We identified 72 patients with CUR who underwent HoLEP and 31 who underwent PVP . Preoperative parameters including median catheterisation duration (3 vs 5 months, P = 0.71), American Urological Association Symptom Index score ( AUASI ; 18 vs 21, P = 0.24), and PVR (555 vs 473 mL, P = 0.096) were similar between the HoLEP and PVP groups. The HoLEP group had a larger prostate volume (88.5 vs 49 mL, P < 0.001) and higher PSA concentration (4.5 vs 2.4 ng/mL, P = 0.001). At median 6‐month follow‐up, 71 (99%) HoLEP patients and 23 (74%) PVP patients were catheter‐free ( P < 0.001). Of the voiding patients, postoperative AUASI (3 vs 4, P = 0.06), maximum urinary flow rate (23 vs 18 mL/s, P = 0.28) and PVR (56.5 vs 54 mL, P = 1.0) were improved in both groups. Conclusions Both HoLEP and PVP are effective at improving urinary parameters in men with CUR . Despite larger prostate volumes, HoLEP had a 99% successful deobstruction rate, thus rendering patients catheter‐free.