Choledochal cyst should be considered in all patients below 40 years of age presenting with biliary colic, pancreatitis or recurrent cholangitis with associated dilatation of bile duct. Complete excision of the cyst with restoration of biliary-enteric communication by hepaticojejunostomy form the basis of ideal treatment.
Objective:The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of a computer based stent registry with patient directed automated information system to prevent retained double J stents.Materials and Methods:A stent registry system was developed in collaboration with our Computerized Hospital Information Processing Service Department. This computer based stent registry with patient directed automated information system was integrated with the existing clinical work station. We reviewed the records retrospectively and assessed the feasibility of the system in reminding clinicians and patients regarding the stent and its date of removal.Results:In a short run at our department, this new system appeared feasible, with patients promptly responding to the short message service and letter alerts.Conclusions:Computer based stent registry with patient directed automated information system is feasible in a clinical setting. A prospective study is needed for evaluation of its efficacy in preventing retained stents.
Emphysematous pyelonephritis (EPN) is a rare occurrence in renal allografts. An aggressive approach resulting in transplant nephrectomy is viewed as the standard of care. Over the recent years, treatment with percutaneous drainage (PCD) of the renal and perinephric collections and appropriate antibiotics has been reported with good success in lesser grades of this infection. Only 4 cases of extensive EPN disease with Escherichia coli, treated with conservative management, are reported in the English-language literature. We present a case of severe EPN caused by Klebsiella pneumoniae, successfully managed with early PCD, and propose a step-up strategy aimed toward graft preservation.
ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of tamsulosin vs the combination of tamsulosin and tadalafil in male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS).
Patients and MethodsThis was a double-blinded, parallel-arm randomised controlled trial. Men aged >45 years with moderate LUTS and a maximum urinary flow rate (Q max ) of 5-15 mL/s were included. One arm received 0.4 mg tamsulosin only (Group-A), while the second received 5 mg tadalafil with tamsulosin (Group-B). The primary outcome was the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). Secondary outcomes were IPSS quality of life (QoL) score, five-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) score, Q max , and post-void residual urine (PVR). Block randomisation was used. Placebo was used for blinding and allocation concealment. Intention-totreat analysis was used for outcome measures.
ResultsOf the 183 men screened, 140 were randomised (71 in Group-A, 69 in Group-B); 116 (82.85%) (61 in Group-A, 55in Group-B) completed the study. Baseline characteristics were comparable. The improvements in the IPSS, IPSS QoL score, IIEF score and Q max were À1.69 (95% confidence interval [CI] À1.4 to À2.0), À0.70 (95% CI À0.60 to À0.80), 3.8 (95% CI 3.4-4.2) and 1.8 mL/s (95% CI 1.1-2.4) respectively, in favour of the combination group. The difference in PVR was not significant. There were no serious adverse events (AEs). The dropout rate due to AEs was 2.85%. Myalgia (five patients) was the commonest AE in the combination group.
ConclusionThe combination of tamsulosin and tadalafil produced significantly better improvements in LUTS, QoL, erectile function and Q max compared to monotherapy with tamsulosin, without an increase in AEs.
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.