IJU this issue



This issue contains nine Editorial Comments, nine Original Articles, one Case Report, one Short Communication and two Letters to the Editor. Kawashima et al. (Osaka, Japan) describe the impact of hyponatremia on the survival of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with molecular targeted therapy and conclude that hyponatremia (<138 mEq/L), neutrophilia and high C-reactive protein levels seem to represent significant predictive factors for cancer-specific survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients treated with molecular targeted therapy as first-line therapy. The Editorial Comment by Saito (Tokyo, Japan) points out that the longitudinal evaluation of sodium levels would be helpful for the better management of renal cell carcinoma patients treated with vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted agents.

Adibi et al. (Dallas, USA) describe oncological outcomes after radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Outcomes after radical nephroureterectomy have not changed significantly over the past three decades, despite staging and surgical refinements. Utilization of perioperative systemic chemotherapy in urothelial carcinoma management remains low.

Simone et al. (Rome, Italy) describe development and external validation of lymph node density cut-off points in prospective series of radical cystectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection. Lymph node density is the strongest predictor of cancer-specific survival. The Editorial Comment by Jensen (Aarhus, Denmark) is interesting, he describes the most important part of the surgery might not be removing many lymph nodes, but to remove the right ones.

Koutlidis et al. (Dijon, France) describe robot-assisted or pure laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. In their single-surgeon experience, prostate-specific antigen levels and prostate weight are predictive of positive surgical margin in patients undergoing nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy, whereas there seems to be no difference between the robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and the laparoscopic radical prostatectomy techniques.

Teishima et al. (Hiroshima, Japan) describe the impact of pre-implant lower urinary tract symptoms on postoperative urinary morbidity after permanent prostate brachytherapy.

Jeong et al. (Seongnam, Korea) describe the clinical prognosis and predictive factors of further recovery of urinary continence in patients not achieving continence within 1 year after radical prostatectomy. Aslam and Agarwal (Cardiff, UK) describe long-term functional outcomes of detrusor myectomy. The mean follow up was 148 months. An overall success rate of 48.5% (16/33 patients) was achieved.

Neuman et al. (Nahariya, Israel) describe the comparison of two inside-out transobturator suburethral sling techniques (de-Leval and Flam) for stress incontinence. The de-Leval group showed significantly more frequent and lasted longer postoperative thigh pain that was self-limited and lasted no longer than 2 weeks compared with the Flam group (31.9% vs 10.0%, respectively). Urinary urgency was also more frequent in the de-Leval patients (20.3% vs 2.8%).

Tasdemir et al. (Malatya, Turkey) describe the protective effects of intravesical hyaluronic acid and chondroitin sulfate alone and in combination for urinary tract infection in a rat model. The hyaluronic acid and chondroitin sulfate combination has a potential benefit in reducing the bacterial load in urine and the thickness of the transitional epithelium.

We have one Case Report by Pasricha et al. (New Delhi, India). They report a rare case of bilateral, multicenteric metanephric adenoma associated with Wilms' tumor in a child.

In the one Short Communication, single-session ureteroscopy with holmium laser lithotripsy for multiple stones is evaluated by Takazawa et al. (Tokyo, Japan).

We have two Letters to the Editor by Kaneko et al. (Tokyo, Japan), and Claus et al. (Leuven, Belgium). Their topics are dopamine-secreting corticomedullary mixed tumor of the adrenal gland, and coincidence of seminoma and sarcoidosis in two patients presenting with peritoneal surface disease.

Conflict of interest

None declared.