Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate inflammation parameters and assess the utility of the neutrophillymphocyte ratio (NLR) as a simple and readily available predictor for clinical disease activity in patients with nenign prostate hyperplasia BPH. We also aimed to investigate the relationship between inflammatory parameters with α-blocker therapy response, and evaluate the potential association between NLR and the progression of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Materials and Methods: We examined 320 consecutive patients ( .001); however, there were no significant differences between the groups in terms of age (p>0.05), and prostate volume (p>0.05). Conclusions: NLR can predict BPH progression. We propose that increased inflammation is negatively associated with clinical status in BPH patients and suggest that NLR can give information along with LUTS severity which may be used as a readikly accessible marker for patient follow-up.

In the study, eight patients of the BPPV group (16%) had a high thyroid antibody level. In the non-BPPV group, six patients (11.5%) had elevated thyroid antibodies. In the control group, 15 patients (25%) had elevated thyroid antibodies. TSH values of all subjects were detected to be within normal range. No statistical difference was found between the groups with respect to TG-Ab and TPO-Ab values (p-values = 0.729 and 0.812, respectively).

Perineal procedures have higher recurrence and lower mortality rates than abdominal alternatives for the treatment of rectal prolapse. Presence of incarceration and strangulation also influences treatment choice. Perineal rectosigmoidectomy is one of the treatment options in patients with incarceration and strangulation, with low mortality and acceptable recurrence rates. This operation can be performed especially to avoid general anesthesia in old patients with co-morbidities. We aimed to present perineal rectosigmoidectomy and diverting loop colostomy in a patient with neurological disability due to spinal trauma and incarcerated rectal prolapse. Keywords:Altemeier's procedure, perineal rectosigmoidectomy, rectal prolapse INTRODUCTIONRectal prolapse is a rare disease with an increased frequency after the fifth decade. Rectoanal inhibitory reflex deterioration, high-pressure intermittent rectal motor activity, anorectal sensation disorders, and pudendal neuropathy have been suggested in its pathophysiology, but still its exact etiology is unknown (1). Clinically, it may present as mucosal prolapse (partial or pseudoprolapsus), internal prolapse (rectal intussusception), or full-thickness prolapse (2). Surgical treatment options can be abdominal and/or perineal approach. Despite the higher recurrence rate, due to its low complication rates and better patient tolerance the perineal approach is often preferred in elderly patients with comorbidities, and can be applied in irreducible cases requiring emergency surgery. In this article, a 60-year-old male patient who had had thoracic spine fractures and neurological sequela due to being trapped in a collapsed building twenty years ago, and who underwent perineal rectosigmoidectomy (Altemeier procedure) and protective sigmoid colostomy for incarcerated rectal prolapse is presented. CASE PRESENTATIONA 60-year-old male patient with reduced sensation and muscle strength in both lower limbs and left drop foot sequela due to a traumatic injury twenty years ago presented to the emergency room with an irreducible mass and pain in the anal region that emerged during defecation 6 hours ago. He had experienced fecal incontinence, constipation, and a rectal prolapse that could be manually reduced for the past 6 months. He had hypertension, diabetes mellitus type 2, and was being treated for benign prostatic hypertrophy. The patient was conscious, cooperative, and oriented. On physical examination, his vital signs were normal except for sinus tachycardia (120/min). On anal inspection, he had 20 cm full-thickness prolapse of the rectum and sigmoid colon. The prolapsed segment was edematous and hyperemic. There were areas of ulceration up to 2 cm in diameter. Bowel sounds were normoactive, there were no signs of abdominal tenderness, defense or rebound tenderness. His neurologic examination revealed a left drop foot, and slightly atrophied muscles in both calves and lower limbs, more prominent on the left. Both lower extremity manual muscle strength was determined as 3/5. Although ...

Objectives: Clinical application of gentamicin may cause nephrotoxicity and ototoxicity. Our study is the first study to investigate the protective effects of edaravone against the gentamicin-induced ototoxicity. We investigated the protective effect of intraperitoneal (i.p.) edaravone application against gentamicin-induced ototoxicity in guinea pigs. Methods: Fourteen guinea pigs were divided into two equal groups consisting of a control group and a study group. One-hundred sixty milligrams per kilogram subcutaneous gentamicin and 0.3 mL i.p. saline were applied simultaneously once daily to seven guinea pigs in the control group (group 1). One-hundred sixty milligrams per kilogram gentamicin was applied subcutaneously and 3 mg/kg edaravone was applied intraperitoneally once daily for 7 days simultaneously to seven guinea pigs in the study group (group 2). Following the drug application, auditory brainstem response measurements were performed for the left ear on the 3rd and 7th days. Results: Hearing threshold values of the group 1 and group 2 measured in the 3rd day of the study were detected as 57.14 ± 4.88 and 82.86 ± 7.56, respectively. This difference was statistically significant ( p < 0.05). Hearing threshold values of the group 1 and group 2 measured in the 7th day of the study were detected as 87.14 ± 4.88 and 62.86 ± 4.88, respectively. This difference was statistically significant ( p < 0.05). Conclusion: A statistically significant difference between the average threshold values of edaravone-administered group 2 and that of group 1 without edaravone was found. These differences show that systemic edaravone administration could diminish ototoxic effects of gentamicin and the severity of the hearing loss.

No abstract