Search

Introduction: The prevalence rate of upper urinary tract calculi in Saudi Arabia is one of the highest globally. Bilateral renal stone management is an option but is still controversial. Methodology: The study was a retrospective study, including 31 patients with bilateral renal or ureteric stones who underwent bilateral same-session ureterorenoscopy (BSS-URS). The data collected included age, gender, body mass index (BMI), stone burden bilaterally, operative time bilaterally, hospital stay, stone location, type of anesthesia, stone history, renal anomaly as well as pre- and postoperative JJ stenting. In addition, data related to complications (ureteric injury, renal failure, urinary tract infection, pain requiring an emergency department visit within 1 week of the procedure), the stone-free rate (defined as £ 3 mm asymptomatic stone fragment identified with computed tomography Kidney, Ureter and Bladder 3 months after surgery was also collected. The data were collected from the electronic patient record system, entered in an Excel spreadsheet, and descriptive analysis was done. Results: In total, 31 patients were included, with the majority (80.6%, n = 25) male. The mean age was 41.6 years, the mean BMI 28.7 ± 5.59, the mean operative time for each renal unit 46.53 ± 25.69 min, and the mean hospital stay 17.87 ± 8.43 h. The majority (96.7%, n = 30) received general anesthesia. Less than half (40.3%, n = 25) of the renal units had stones in multiple calyces and the majority (90.3%, n = 56) of the renal units were stone free at the 3-month follow-up. A small proportion (3.2%, n = 2) of the renal units were polycystic. Prestenting was documented in 40.3% (n = 25) of the renal units and the majority (95.2%, n = 59) were stented postoperatively. Conclusion: BSS-URS is a safe and a highly effective management option for bilateral renal stones. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study evaluates the satisfaction of urology residents with the Saudi Board of Urology (SBU) Training Program and identifies areas of weakness and strength to improve the educational environment, surgical competency, and overall satisfaction of urology residents with the program. Methods: We administered an electronic self-made questionnaire that included two sections. One comprised demographic data (age, gender, weight, height, marital status, level of training, city of training, and center of training), while the other concerned SBU evaluation (satisfaction with different aspects of training, such as ways of assessment, mentors' feedback, surgical competency, research, and strengths and weaknesses of SBU). Results: The overall satisfaction of urology residency program was 28.8% while 44.2% of residents had a neutral response. The highest level of satisfaction with clinical and surgical practice was among graduates (56.9%) and Riyadh residents (45.1%). Furthermore, good work/life balance received the lowest level of satisfaction (5.2%) among senior residents, while good clinical experience received the highest level (62.7%) among the graduates. Residents reported a high exposure in endourology and pediatric urology, while transplant, reconstructive, and neurourology had the lowest exposure. Forty-two percent of respondents undertook research during their residency training, but most respondents (54%) did not publish any research papers during their training. Sixty-two percent of graduates felt that their training program did not prepare them adequately to perform well on the board examinations. Conclusion: Our results confirmed that satisfaction of residents with the urology program process is variable according to the city of training. Having high satisfaction level in some cities reflects the improvement of urology training program after restructuring. We identified new areas in need of improvement, namely lack of mentorship, clear and formal assessment process, and variation of training process between central and peripheral programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]