OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study isto present the content of existing Guidelines on medical management of urinary stone disease.
METHODS: A search for current Guidelines from national and international urological Associations was performed in Societe International d\'Urologie and American Urological Association websites, along with a search in Pubmed/MEDLINE until 30/06/2020. Two authors performed an independent search and data extraction regarding medical management of acute renal colic, medical expulsive treatment, dietary modifications and pharmaceutical interventions for prevention of stone disease recurrence. Quality of Guidelines was assessed by the two reviewers using the AGREE II instrument.
RESULTS: Literature search revealed 82 Associations, while eight of them provide recommendations/Guidelines on medical management of stone disease. Non-steroidalanti-inflammatory drugs or paracetamol are the most common 1st line treatment proposed for acute pain management, with opiates following next. Use of a-blockers is also indicated by most Guidelines for facilitating expulsion of distal ureteral stones 5-10 mm, after shockwave or laser lithotripsy or for alleviating stent-related symptoms. Adequate fluid in take, normal dietary calcium consumption and sodium restriction with varying daily limits, are universal dietary modifications from urological Associations on prevention of stone disease. Thiazidesand alkaline citrates are proposed usually for calciumoxalate stone formers with differences in grading of the recommendations, while urinary alkalization with allopurinol or febuxostat as a second line treatment is acommon treatment algorithm for urate stones, but with differences in target urine pH. European and American Urological Association Guidelines, along with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommendations were the most highly rated based on AGREE II.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite methodological heterogeneity and subjective rating of recommendations, an acceptable degree of consensus was noted on Guidelines regarding medical management of stone disease.
UNASSIGNED: El objetivo de este estudio es presentar el contenido de las guías clínicas existentes enel manejo medico de las litiasis urinarias. MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS: Una búsqueda de las guías clínicas actuales de las asociaciones nacionales e internaciones se realizó en la pagina web de la Societe International d’ Urologie y la American Urological Association, junto con una búsque da en Pubmed/Medline hasta el 30 junio 2020. Dos autores realizaron una búsqueda independiente y la extracción de datos en relación al manejo medico del cólico renal agudo, tratamiento medico expulsivo, modificaciones en la dieta e intervenciones farmacológicas para la prevención de la recurrencia en la litiasis. La calidad de las guías se determinó por dos revisores externos utilizando el instrumento AGREE II.
UNASSIGNED: La búsqueda en la literatura demostró 82 asociaciones, mientras que ocho de estas promueven recomendaciones/guías en el manejo medico de la litiasis. Antiinflamatorios no-esteroideos o paracetamol son los tratamientos de primera línea mas comunes para el manejo del dolor agudo, siendo los opioides el siguiente. El uso de alfa-bloqueantes esta también indicado por la mayoría de las guías para facilitar la expulsión de litiasis del uréter distal de 5 a 10 mm, después de litotricia o después de lasertricia o para aliviar los síntomas relacionados con los catéteres. La ingesta de fluidos adecuada, consumo normal de calcio en la dieta y restricción de sodio con limites variables, son las recomendaciones dietéticas universales de las asociaciones urológicas en la prevención de las litiasis. Tiazidas y citratos alcalinos se proponen para los formadores de litiasis de oxalato cálcico con diferencias en el grado de las recomendaciones, mientras la alcalinización de la orina con alopurinol o febuxostat es la segunda línea de tratamiento en el algoritmo de las litiasis de urato, pero con diferencias en el pH urinario final. Las guías europeas y americanas, junto con las guías del instituto nacional de salud y las recomendaciones care excellence fueron las mejor reportadas en relación a AGREE II.CONCLUSIÓN: A pesar de todo y con la heterogeneidad metodológica y las recomendaciones subjetivas, hay un grado aceptable de consenso en las guías clínicas en relación al manejo medico de la enfermedad litiásica.

The objective was to develop a laboratory procedure to validate American Urological Association (AUA) Guideline on vasectomy success when nonmotile spermatozoa are found in the post-vasectomy ejaculate. The neutral α-glucosidase (NAG) an epididymal protein assay modified to determine the activity at 30 and 90 min of incubation from 24 pre- and 47 post-vasectomy ejaculates. The difference between the two points in the relative activity was calculated and if the difference was nonsignificant will confirm vasectomy success. The mean differences in the relative NAG activity were significantly different in pre- and post-vasectomy ejaculates, respectively. The mean differences in the relative NAG activity were similar in post-vasectomy ejaculates with and without nonmotile spermatozoa. No difference in relative NAG activity in post-vasectomy ejaculates between two time points of incubation may be a reliable method to confirm occlusion of the vas deferens. It also validates the recommendation by AUA Guideline on vasectomy success in the presence of few nonmotile spermatozoa.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this guideline is to provide a clinical framework for the use of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy as adjuvant or salvage therapy.
METHODS: A systematic literature review using the PubMed®, Embase, and Cochrane databases was conducted to identify peer-reviewed publications relevant to the use of radiotherapy after prostatectomy. The review yielded 294 articles; these publications were used to create the evidence-based guideline statements. Additional guidance is provided as Clinical Principles when insufficient evidence existed.
RESULTS: Guideline statements are provided for patient counseling, the use of radiotherapy in the adjuvant and salvage contexts, defining biochemical recurrence, and conducting a re-staging evaluation.
CONCLUSIONS: Physicians should offer adjuvant radiotherapy to patients with adverse pathologic findings at prostatectomy (i.e., seminal vesicle invasion, positive surgical margins, extraprostatic extension) and should offer salvage radiotherapy to patients with prostatic specific antigen or local recurrence after prostatectomy in whom there is no evidence of distant metastatic disease. The offer of radiotherapy should be made in the context of a thoughtful discussion of possible short- and long-term side effects of radiotherapy as well as the potential benefits of preventing recurrence. The decision to administer radiotherapy should be made by the patient and the multi-disciplinary treatment team with full consideration of the patient\'s history, values, preferences, quality of life, and functional status. Please visit the ASTRO and AUA websites (http://www.redjournal.org/webfiles/images/journals/rob/RAP%20Guideline.pdf and http://www.auanet.org/education/guidelines/radiation-after-prostatectomy.cfm) to view this guideline in its entirety, including the full literature review.