[Urologist 2.0: how to lead the change]

Modern urology started about 150 years ago in France, with a strong contribution made by other European countries including Italy. The figure of the modern urologist is linked to a technological evolution but also to the contribution made by great men who have played a crucial role in the evolution of the surgical technique and in the clinical approach to the discipline. An analysis of the evolution of the surgical technique of radical prostatectomy can be paradigmatic in describing the development and, above all, the direction of the hyper-specialization concerning the urologic discipline. To this kind of centrifugal fragmentation is associated a fragmentation at the scientific level which can be defined as centripetal, with a multiplicity of national societies that ultimately complicate the management of the urology discipline. This pathway, made up of divisions and hyper-specializations, contrasts with another less travelled one, which foresees a drastic revision of the figure of the urologist and of the urological discipline in its totality. One which places the patient at the center of the scene, and not only his pathology. Urology cannot become the mere execution of surgical acts, and the objective of our National Residency Programmes should not be solely to form the "perfect surgeon", but to produce a complete specialist able to manage prevention and a correct diagnosis and to guarantee a therapeutic approach including the uro-andrological follow-up of the patient. It is necessary that both basic research and translational research become an integral part of the formative baggage of the young urologist.