MyMedR

Displaying all 4 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Fulltext Prophylactic direct oral anticoagulants vs. low molecular weight heparin after urological surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Ramadhan M, AlMehandi A, Al-Naseem A, Hayat J, Almarzouq A

Arab J Urol, 2025;23(1):84-94.
PMID: 39776556 DOI: 10.1080/20905998.2024.2395202

PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes of using prophylactic direct oral anti-coagulants (DOAC) and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) after major urologic surgery.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Systematic literature searches of MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL were performed up to 9 November 2023, and protocols were registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024494424). The primary outcomes were post-operative incidence of VTE and bleeding. The secondary outcomes included re-admissions and transfusions needed, post-operative complications and exploring the radical cystectomy sub-group. Outcomes were reported in 30 and 90 days where feasible with sub-group analysis.
RESULTS: Searches yielded four studies that included 856 patients and the outcomes were reported within 30 and 90 days, with sub-analysis performed for each time-interval. We found no statistically significant differences between DOAC and LWMH within neither primary nor secondary outcomes; VTE events (RR 0.36; p = 0.06); bleeding events (RR 0.64; p = 0.45); re-admissions (RR 1.14; p = 0.39); transfusions (RR 0.42; p = 0.05) within 0-90 days and post-operative complications within 30 days (RR 0.76; p = 0.17). Similar results were found when exploring radical cystectomy sub-group: VTE risk (RR 0.42, p = 0.15), bleeding risk (RR 1.09; p = 0.90), and re-admissions to hospital (RR 1.18, p = 0.35). Limitations include small sample size, and difficult generalization to all urological surgery as most of the analyzed cohort underwent radical cystectomy.
CONCLUSION: DOACs may be a safe and possibly cost-effective alternative to LMWH as post-operative thromboprophylaxis. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution due to limitations; therefore, more randomized studies are needed to ascertain our findings.
The era of telesurgery: insights from ultra-long-distance Asia to Middle East human telesurgery robotic assisted radical prostatectomy

Aldousari S, Almarzouq A, Hassan A, Shahin A, Bubishate S, Bahbahani B

J Robot Surg, 2025 Mar 11;19(1):108.
PMID: 40064737 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-025-02274-9

To show the feasibility of performing human telesurgery robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) between two countries using low-latency ultra-long-distance connectivity. This study described the outcomes of performing RARP on a man in his 60's with localized intermediate-risk prostatic adenocarcinoma located in Kuwait City while the surgeon (SA) was approximately 7000 kilometers (Km) away at Toumai robotic surgical system (TRSS) headquarters in Shanghai. Operative and connectivity details were reported. RARP was performed in December 2024. There were no major clinical or technical problems encountered during the procedure. The average round-trip latency (RTL) was 181.4 milliseconds (ms) using fiber optic broadband network with 5G network as back-up. On the Shanghai end two wired broadband networks were employed as back-up to ensure patient safety. There was an experienced fellowship-trained robotic surgeon (AA) in the operating room in Kuwait capable of taking over in case of clinical or connectivity issues. There were no reported complications. The patient was discharged on postoperative day (POD) 2. Final pathology described Gleason score 7(3 + 4), ISUP 2, and negative surgical margins (pT2Nx). The catheter was removed on POD 9, and the patient was continent a week later. His serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) was undetectable seven weeks post-operatively. This study described the feasibility of human RARP telesurgery between two countries using low-latency, long-distance fiber optic broadband network with 5G network as back-up with successful clinical outcomes. There is a need to establish robust legal and regulatory framework to allow wider international expansion of telesurgery.
Ultrasound versus fluoroscopy-guided extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in renal calculi: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Ramadhan M, Braga A, Alzaid M, Benzouak T, Hamouche F, Almarzouq A

Urolithiasis, 2025 Feb 26;53(1):41.
PMID: 40009135 DOI: 10.1007/s00240-025-01696-2

Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) is one of the first-line treatments in the management of renal stones and is usually performed using fluoroscopic (FS) guidance. Ultrasonography (US) is a potential alternative with minimal radiation exposure. The primary aim of this study was to compare the stone free rate (SFR) between US and FS guided ESWL. The secondary outcomes were overall complications, re-intervention rate, hematuria, UTI, pain occurrence and number of shocks required. A prospectively registered systematic review and meta-analysis (CRD42024511335) according to PRISMA guidelines, was conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, were searched up to February 15, 2024. Snowballing techniques and Google Scholar were used for external gray literature. Adult and pediatric subgroups were pooled and individually analyzed. Twelve studies were identified with 2673 patients. Ultrasonography yielded a significantly favorable SFR (OR 1.43;95%CI [1.06-1.94]; P = 0.02). This difference was found only in the adult subgroup. No differences were found between modalities, nor within any subgroup in terms of secondary outcomes. In this meta-analysis, US-ESWL demonstrated a higher SFR compared to standard FS-ESWL However, this finding was shown only in adult patients, and although there was no difference in pediatric patients, the minimized radiation exposure remains an attractive attribute in US-ESWL.These results should be interpreted cautiously, due to a limited number of RCTs and heterogeneity between studies. More research is needed especially in pediatric populations, to further elucidate the role of US in ESWL.
Advancing the evidence base in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: the need for consensus outcomes and standardized reporting

Ramadhan M, Alzaid M, Benzouak T, Braga A, Hamouche F, Almarzouq A

Urolithiasis, 2025 Aug 16;53(1):156.
PMID: 40817970 DOI: 10.1007/s00240-025-01827-9