ABSTRACT Objectives: To evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on clinical and surgical practice, educational activities, health and lifestyle behavior of Brazilian urology residents. Materials and Methods: A web-based survey was sent to 468 Brazilian urology residents from postgraduate years (PGY) 3 to 5 to collect data on clinical practice and training after 4 months of COVID-19. We also assessed health-related and behavior changes, rate of infection by SARS-CoV-2, deployment to the front line of COVID-19, residents’ concerns, and access to personal protective equipment (PPE). Results: Massive reductions in elective and emergency patient consultations, diagnostic procedures and surgeries were reported across the country, affecting PGY 3 to 5 alike. Most in-person educational activities were abolished. The median damage to the urological training expected for 2020 was 6.0 [3.4 – 7.7], on a scale from 0 to 10, with senior residents estimating a greater damage (P< 0.001). Educational interventions developed included online case-based discussions, subspeciality conferences and lectures, and grand rounds. Most senior residents favored extending residency to compensate for training loss and most younger residents favored no additional training (p< 0.001). Modifications in health and lifestyle included weight gain (43.8%), reduced physical activity (68.6%), increased alcoholic intake (44.9%) and cigarette consumption (53.6%), worsening of sexual life (25.2%) and feelings of sadness or depression (48,2%). Almost half were summoned to work on the COVID-19 front-line and 24.4% had COVID-19. Most residents had inadequate training to deal with COVID-19 patients and most reported a shortage of PPE. Residents’ concerns included the risk of contaminating family members, being away from residency program, developing severe COVID-19 and overloading colleagues. Conclusions: COVID-19 had a massive impact in Brazilian urology residents´ training, health and lifestyle behavior, which may reflect what happened in other medical specialties. Studies should confirm these findings to help developing strategies to mitigate residents’ losses.

ABSTRACT Objectives To evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on clinical practice, income, health and lifestyle behavior of Brazilian urologists during the month of April 2020. Materials and Methods A 39-question, web-based survey was sent to all urologist members of the Brazilian Society of Urology. We assessed socio-demographic, professional, health and behavior parameters. The primary goal was to evaluate changes in urologists’ clinical practice and income after two months of COVID-19. We also looked at geographical differences based on the incidence rates of COVID-19 in different states. Results Among 766 urologists who completed the survey, a reduction ≥ 50% of patient visits, elective and emergency surgeries was reported by 83.2%, 89.6% and 54.8%, respectively. An income reduction of ≥ 50% was reported by 54.3%. Measures to reduce costs were implemented by most. Video consultations were performed by 38.7%. Modifications in health and lifestyle included weight gain (32.9%), reduced physical activity (60.0%), increased alcoholic intake (39.9%) and reduced sexual activity (34.9%). Finally, 13.5% of Brazilian urologists were infected with SARS-CoV-2 and about one third required hospitalization. Urologists from the highest COVID-19 incidence states were at a higher risk to have a reduction of patient visits and non-essential surgeries (OR=2.95, 95% CI 1.86 – 4.75; p< 0.0001) and of being infected with SARS-CoV-2 (OR=4.36 95%CI 1.74-10.54, p=0.012). Conclusions COVID-19 produced massive disturbances in Brazilian urologists’ practice, with major reductions in patient visits and surgical procedures. Distressing consequences were also observed on physicians’ income, health and personal lives. These findings are probably applicable to other medical specialties.

OBJETIVO: Avaliar a crioterapia percutânea como tratamento primário para o câncer de próstata de alto risco. PACIENTES E MÉTODOS: De outubro de 2000 a fevereiro de 2005, 21 pacientes com câncer de próstata de alto risco foram submetidos a 24 crioablações de próstata como tratamento primário. A mediana de idade dos pacientes foi de 70,9, e a média do PSA pré-tratamento de 19,5 ng/dl. O tempo de seguimento variou de 6 a 60 meses (mediana de 41 meses). RESULTADOS: Os índices de falha do PSA foram de 39% e 52,9% respectivamente aos 12 e 24 meses de seguimento. A sobrevida livre de doença em 5 anos foi de 42,8%. De maneira geral os índices de complicações foram baixos, com 8% de incontinência urinária e nenhum caso de lesão retal. Os índices de impotência foram de 96%. Em doze pacientes (57,2%) onde houve falha da crioablação, 7 (58,3%) apresentaram recidivas locais (biópsia positiva) e os demais recidiva a distância. CONCLUSÃO: A crioablação percutânea da próstata é um tratamento minimamente invasivo da próstata, seguro, porém ainda com resultados modestos em pacientes com câncer de próstata de alto risco, quando se considera a sobrevida livre de doença em 5 anos, havendo portanto necessidade de associação de outras modalidades terapêuticas no tratamento deste grupo específico de doentes.

PURPOSE: To evaluate percutaneous cryotherapy as a primary treatment option for high-risk prostate cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From October 2000 to February 2005, 21 high-risk (Gleason e•8 and/or PSA > 10 and/or stage > T2a) prostate cancer patients underwent 24 percutaneous prostate cryoablation procedures. Patients' median age was 70.9, and the average pretreatment PSA was 19.5 ng/dL. The follow-up period ranged from 6 to 60 months (median, 41 months). RESULTS: The PSA failure rate was 39%, 52.9%, and 42.8% at 12, 24, and 60 months of follow-up, respectively. Overall complication rates were low, with 8% of urinary incontinence and no cases of rectal injury; however, 96% of erectile dysfunction occurred. The cryoablation procedure failed in 12 patients (57.2%); 7 (58.3%) of these were local failures (positive prostate biopsies). CONCLUSION: Percutaneous cryoablation of the prostate is a safe minimally invasive treatment, but it has poor PSA-free survival outcomes in high-risk prostate cancer patients.