In this issue of the UroPrecision, we delve into the evolution of urological reconstructive surgery, a field that has significantly progressed in the past decade. Initially, the subspecialty of reconstructive urology was the traditional domain for the management of traumatic urologic injuries and surgical correction of male urethral stricture disease. However, as more urologists developed an interest in managing these conditions, became subspecialty trained, and learned the detailed intricacies of reconstructive surgery, the field has expanded to include surgical management of the upper urinary tract, robotics, urinary incontinence, and iatrogenic problems such as radiation injury to the urinary system.
This focused issue of the UroPrecision presents four original articles covering various aspects of patient management in reconstructive urology. These articles not only demonstrate changes in the field through the refinement of classic techniques, updates in patient management, and technological enhancements of surgery but also present original research with unique data sets. These data sets reflect the changes in how patients interact with each other for support, specifically through the Internet, providing a fresh perspective on patient care.
The article by Yu et al.[
1] is a comprehensive review article illustrating the complexity of posterior urethral reconstruction and the challenges of surgical management of stenosis in the proximal segments of the urethra and lower urinary tract. A strength of this article is the inclusion of evolving robotic surgical techniques, minimally invasive transurethral endoscopic surgery, and the review of the current literature review, including recent guidelines from the American Urological Association.
Walasek and colleagues[
2] push surgical innovation further in their perspective article on advanced robot‐assisted urologic surgery and standardization of cutting‐edge single‐port robotic surgery techniques in ureteral reconstruction. Ureteral reconstruction is often reoperative surgery in areas of altered anatomy, and dense scarring is a typical finding. The single‐port approach offers advantages over a traditional open or robotic surgical approach by using different locations, such as the retroperitoneum, to begin the procedure.
In an original research article, Matz et al.[
3] describe their outcomes in managing urethral erosion in patients with artificial urinary sphincters (AUS). Their article not only enhances our knowledge about the controversy of managing urethral erosion but also provides valuable insights that can potentially improve patient outcomes and guide future research in this area.
The original research article by Fernandez et al.[
4]is a unique analysis of online discussion boards concerning postprostate treatment incontinence. Using an online search method to identify online patient forums, they demonstrate that society has moved from quiet communication among patients with similar geographic locations to a worldwide online support community. Their study highlights the global impact of online platforms on patient support and provides valuable insights for urologists and urologic providers to approach patient management discussion in a different light.
2024 The Author(s). UroPrecision published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Higher Education Press.
PDF
(66KB)
