This study was done to identify the value of the commonly performed investigations available for identifying urinary stone disease, namely X-ray of the kidney, ureter and bladder (KUB) regions and ultrasound scan (USS) to recognize stones in patients suspected to have the disease. Two hundred patients who attended the stone clinic with symptoms suggestive of urinary stone disease and had either stone retrieved or have been followed up for minimum of 6 months were interviewed. The final opinion on stone disease was made after follow-up to assess the efficacy of the initial opinion based on the plain X-ray KUB or USS. The patients were classified as proved stone patients only after retrieval of stones. The efficacy of the initial screening investigation was assessed to calculate the specificity and sensitivity of the two modalities of investigation. Of the 200 patients studied, all had plain X-ray KUB. Only 166 patients had USS for recognizing stones in the urinary tract; 74 patients showed positive evidence of stones either by X-ray or USS. The findings of the two modalities of investigation are given below. Number of X-rays done, 200; number positive, 24; proved positive, 24 (stone retrieved); proved negative, 0; number negative, 176; proved positive, 32 (stone retrieved); proved negative, 144; number of USS done, 166; number positive, 120; proved positive, 50 (stone retrieved); proved negative, 70; number negative, 46; proved positive, 14 (stone retrieved); proved negative, 32. USS showed back presence effects in 62 patients. Of these, 12% showed stones in the ureter, whereas the rest did not show evidence of stones. Those selected as positive stones finally had either passed stones or had PCNL, URS, cystolithotripsy or open surgery or were put on high-dose chemotherapy. Forty-six patients who had no ROS in KUB and no stones in USS passed stones subsequently. It is concluded that the plain both X-ray KUB and USS should be performed in patients with suspected stone disease for identifying stone disease and also to exclude other pathology which may produce similar urinary symptoms.
SummaryGlomus tumours are benign tumours of the temperature-sensitive neuromyoarterial glomus body, present within the dermis, which are most commonly seen as solitary subungual lesions on the arms. Multiple glomus tumours or glomangiomas are a less common subtype of extradigital glomus tumours, which very rarely present as large plaque-like dermal lesions. Glomangiomas do not often show the classic triad of symptoms associated with glomus tumours, namely: pain, point tenderness on compression, and temperature sensitivity. As a result of this and of their atypical morphology, they can often be misdiagnosed as vascular malformations (VMs), resulting in delayed diagnosis and inappropriate treatment. We report a 29-year-old man with multiple extradigital glomus tumours that had been present since childhood, with the lesion on the patient's leg being the largest plaque-like glomangioma yet reported, to our knowledge. Spectral greyscale and Doppler shift ultrasonography showed multiple, tubulonodular, ectatic, noncompressible, vascular structures with aberrant flow within the thickened dermis. Using magnetic resonance imaging, low to intermediate signal was seen on T1-weighted images and high signal on T2-weighted images, and there was florid enhancement with gadolinium, with no evidence of extension into muscle or bone. Histology showed abnormal, dilated, thin-walled, vascular channels lined with multiple layers of glomus cells, confirming the diagnosis of a glomangioma. We discuss imaging techniques for plaque-like glomangiomas, and review the clinical, radiological and histological characteristics that help differentiate them from other superficial VMs.
IntroductionHartmann's procedure is widely performed to fix colonic obstruction and perforation. It should ideally be followed by a reversal to restore bowel continuity. Reversal of Hartmann's procedure was traditionally performed using an open technique. However, in recent days, the use of a laparoscopic approach has become increasingly popular. In our retrospective observational study, we aim to investigate the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open reversal of Hartmann's procedure in a UK tertiary centre. MethodsAll patients who underwent reversal of their Hartmann's procedure between January 2017 and December 2019 were included in the study. Data including demographics, days between primary operation and reversal, laparoscopic or open reversal, length of hospital stay following reversal procedure, 30-day readmission, mortality, and complication rate were collected. Statistical analysis was performed using t-test and chi-squared test. ResultsForty-nine patients underwent reversal of Hartmann's procedure from January 2017 to December 2019. The mean age of our cohort was 59.6 ± 13.2 years. There was no significant difference in baseline demographics of both groups, apart from the number of days between the primary operation and reversal procedure. There was also no statistical difference in length of stay, 30-day readmission, and mortality between laparoscopic and open reversal techniques. However, there was a higher incidence of wound complications in patients who underwent open reversal of Hartmann's procedure. ConclusionThe reversal of Hartmann's procedure is a challenging operation. We found no significant difference between both open and laparoscopic approaches, but our study might be confounded by various factors including small sample size and selection bias. A larger, randomised study with greater statistical power is needed to confirm our findings.
This paper attempts to assess the current status of the various modalities of available treatment for urinary stone disease in the Kerala scenario. A total of 300 patients who attended the stone clinic with urinary stone disease and had stones retrieved by different means were selected for the study. Their clinical symptoms, demographic profile, size, number and position of stones, metabolic profiles, retrieval modalities and end result of treatment in terms of stone clearance were assessed. Instances of failure, incomplete clearance and complication events were noted. Based on the experiences, a flowchart was created for appropriate decision-making in urinary stone management. The modalities of retrieval included nephrectomy, nephrolithotomy, pyelo-nephrolithotomy, extended pyelolithotomy, pyelolithotomy, ureterolithotomy, cystolithotomy, urethrolithotomy, ESWL, PCNL, URS, cystolithotripsy, urethrolithotripsy and spontaneous passage. The clearance rate of stone was maximum in open surgery. The extent of stone clearance by ESWL depended on various factors. PCNL was mostly limited by the difficulties in achieving puncture at the stone site. Availability of a variety of flexible nephroscopes also altered the success rate of the procedure. There were good success rates in pushing stones from the ureter to the pelvis followed by PCNL. In patients who had successful PCNL, postoperative morbidity was significantly reduced in terms of the number of days of hospitalization, time taken for return to work, absence of urinary leak, site infection, urinoma formation and urinary tract infection. URS was performed in many patients and stones retrieved. However, the indication for the procedure remains doubtful as the size of most of the stones thus retrieved was less than 6 mm. These would have passed out spontaneously or with chemotherapeutic support. URS, lithotripsy and basketting were confronted by upward migration of stones to the kidney, requiring further procedures for retrieval. Introduction of double J stents helped in relieving urinary obstruction, particularly in patients presenting with anuria, but retained stents, forgotten stents and failed stone retrieval were common following the procedure. The procedure of URS was simplified by the presence of dilated ureter in spontaneous stone passers or those with distal obstruction and proximal dilatation. It is concluded from the study that open surgery still remains the sheet anchor of treatment of urinary stones in many patients in Kerala. Newer lesser invasive procedures should be ethically selected. Decisions should be patient based, taking into consideration the economic feasibility for the procedure proposed.
Background: Laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer (LRR) has gained popularity because of better short-term outcomes and less post-operative morbidity. However, LRR is still not endorsed as a standard of care mainly due to concerns centred on oncological safety in comparison with open approach. Moreover, two recent randomised trials (Australian Laparoscopic Cancer of the Rectum [ALaCaRT] and the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group [ACOSOG] Z6051) have failed to prove that LRR is non-inferior to open resection. Studies on oncological adequacy of LRR in the Indian population in terms of quality of mesorectal excision are scarce. In this article, we aim to audit the oncological adequacy of LRR in our centre and thereby critically analyse the reliability of extrapolation of results of ALaCaRT and ACOSOG trials to the Indian population. Methods: We retrospectively analysed the oncological adequacy of LRR in terms of completeness of total mesorectal excision (TME), distal and circumferential resection margin (CRM) status and nodal harvest in patients with rectal cancer who underwent LRR between January 2016 and June 2018 at our centre. Results: Of 157 patients included in this study, a complete TME was achieved in 148 (94.26%) patients and nearly complete in 7 (4.46%) patients. A safe CRM (≥1 mm) was obtained in 151 (96.18%) patients. Distal margin results were negative in 155 (98.73%) patients. Average nodal harvest was 19.86 ± 9.28. Overall surgical success, calculated as a composite measure of negative distal margin and negative CRM and complete TME was 95.54%. Conclusion: Good quality rectal cancer resection can be achieved by experienced laparoscopic surgeons without compromising oncological safety.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.