Abstracts from the Mid-Atlantic Section of the AUA 2020

MA AUA 2020 Abstracts Evaluation of Mobile Health Applications for Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Stress Urinary Incontinence M. Karsalia; R. Malik University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA Introduction: As technology becomes integrated into healthcare, it becomes important to evaluate mobile health applications (apps). We aim to evaluate apps for Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Stress Urinary Incontinence using Xcertia guidelines for medical app quality. Materials & Methods: Mobile medical apps were found on the Apple App Store with keywords “pelvic organ prolapse,” “incontinence,” or “bladder.” Exclusion criteria included 1) not free, 2) not updated in past year.Apps were evaluated along the Xcertia Guidelines. Categories included Operability, Privacy, Security, Content, and Usability. Ratings and sentiment of reviews were assessed. Results: Of 27 found apps, 8 were included. Review sentiment analysis (Table 1) showed 5 apps with majority positive sentiment: Easy Kegel (96% of 225 reviews), Kegel Nation (80% of 5 reviews), Kegel Trainer PFM Exercises (96% of 741 review), PRIVY-US UrinaryHealth (100%of 1 review), and Tät: Pelvic Floor Muscle Exercises (100% of 1 review). Squeeze Time had mostly negative reviews (75% of 4 reviews), Vesica had mostly neutral reviews (50% of 16 reviews), and Kegel Trainer had equal positive, negative, and neutral reviews (of 6). Based on Xcertia Guidelines, all apps had simple and problem-free launch and usability, and none required identifying information (Table 2). Regarding content, 62.5% of apps incorporated an informational component and 37.5% delineated sources. Conclusions: Most apps were functional and well received by users, however quality of app content varied. Only some apps had an informational component, and even less had sources listed. Providers recommending health apps should consider those that meet Xcertia guidelines and have reliable information. MP5-11 Prostatic Urethral Lift (PUL) Demonstrates Real World Effectiveness in Subjects With Obstructive Median Lobes G. Eure 1 ; S. Gange 2 ; A. Hirsh 3 ; H. Reeves 4 ; T. Mueller 5 ; D. Rukstalis 6 1 Urology of Virginia, Virginia Beach, VA, USA; 2 Summit Urology Group, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; 3 Jersey Urology Group, Somers, NJ, USA; 4 Eastern Urological Associates, Greenville, NC, USA; 5 Delaware Valley Urology, Voorhees, NJ, USA; 6 Prisma USC Division of Urology, Columbia, SC, USA Introduction: The MedLift study revealed obstructive median lobe (OML) protrusion can be treated safely and effectively with the minimally invasive PUL. Utilizing the real-world retrospective (RWR) PUL study, we assess outcomes in OML subjects, compared to subjects with obstructive lateral lobes (LL) only and MedLift results. Materials & Methods: 2090 patients across 18 international sites who underwent PUL after market clearance were included in the RWR database. Baseline demographics were compared between RWR OML(n = 228) vs. RWR LL(n = 1311) and MedLift subjects (n = 45). RWR OML symptom outcomes and adverse events were evaluated through 12 months post-PUL and compared to RWR LL subjects. Absolute IPSS scores between RWR OML and MedLift subjects were compared. Results: RWROMLsubjects were 69.8 y.o. with larger prostates (53.3 cc ± 21.3) than RWR LL (45.4 cc ± 19.6) and MedLift (44.2 ± 11.2) subjects, and lower baseline IPSS (19.5 ± 6.9) thanMedLift subjects (24.2 ± 4.9). RWROMLQmax was also lower than RWR LLandMedLift patients. Post-PUL, absolute IPSS andQoLscores were similar between RWR OML and RWR LL subjects throughout follow-up; both groups improved significantly across all timepoints (Figure 1). QoL, Qmax, and PVR in RWR OMLsubjects were similar to or better than RWR LLsubjects. Post-procedure catheterization was similar in RWR OML (7.9%) and RWR LL subjects (5.8%). AE rates were similar between RWR OML and LL subjects. Despite differences in IPSS at baseline between RWROMLandMedLift subjects, follow-up absolute IPSS scores were equivalent at follow-up between both groups. Conclusions: The large multicenter RWR of PUL reveals OML subjects exhibit similar symptom response and safety profile comparedwith LLpatients, confirming results from the controlled MedLift study. MP5-10 Poster Session 5: Urologic Benign Diseases 2 37