Objective: To generate high-quality data comparing the clinical efficacy and safety profile between monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (M-TURP) and bipolar plasmakinetic resection of the prostate (PK-TURP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Materials and Methods: Prospective, randomized, single-blinded study conducted in a tertiary-care public institution (Dec/2014-Aug/2016). Inclusion criteria: prostate of <80g in patients with drug-refractory lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), complications derived from BPH, or both. Exclusion criteria: a history of pelvic surgery/radiotherapy, neurogenic bladder dysfunction or documented/suspected prostate carcinoma. Treatment efficacy evaluated at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Efficacy outcomes: international prostate symptom score (IPSS), quality-of-life (QoL) score, international index of erectile function-5 (IIEF-5), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual urine (PVRU) volume, and prostate volume (PV). Complications and sequelae also assessed. Comparisons performed with parametric/non-parametric tests. Results: Out of the 100 hundred patients, 84 qualified for the analysis (45 M-TURP/39 PK-TURP). No significant differences found in baseline characteristics or operative data, except for a longer operative time in PK-TURP (MD:7.9min; 95%CI:0.13-15.74; p=0.04). No differences found in IPSS, Qmax or PVRU volume. QoL score at 12 months was higher in PK-TURP (MD:0,9points; 95%CI:0.18-1.64; p=0.01). No differences in sexual function, PV, complications or sequelae were found. This study is "rigorous" (Jadad-scale) and has a low risk of bias (Cochrane-Handbook). Conclusions: Based on this controlled trial, there is not significant variation in effectiveness and safety between M-TURP and PK-TURP for the treatment of BPH. The small difference in QoL between PK-TURP and M-TURP at the one-year follow-up is not perceivable by the patients and, therefore, not clinically relevant.
We describe a case of Pediatric Inflammatory Multisystem Syndrome temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2 (PIMS-TS) in an 8-year-old child. The patient developed multiorgan dysfunction, including mixed shock, cardiac dysfunction with myocarditis, pneumonia, acute kidney failure, and gastrointestinal involvement characterized by inflammation of the wall of the bowel and pancreatitis. After treatment with Tocilizumab and corticoid therapy, he presented clinical improvement and normalization of inflammatory markers. PIMS-TS is a new disease developed in a small percentage of patients, so a high degree of suspicion is necessary to establish the diagnosis. Supportive care is of paramount importance. The use of Tocilizumab to control the inflammatory response is likely to be beneficial, but the best immunotherapeutic agent has not yet been established. Randomized clinical studies should be run to determine the best treatment.
To review the most used intracorporeal orthotopic ileal neobladder (ICONB) after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer and create a unified compendium of the different alternatives, including new consistent images. We performed a non-systematic review of the literature with the keywords “bladder cancer”, “urinary diversion”, “radical cystectomy”, and “neobladder”. Forty studies were included in the analysis. The most frequent type of ICONB was the modified Studer “U” neobladder (70%) followed by the Hautmann “W” modified neobladder (7.5%), the “Y” neobladder (5%), and the Padua neobladder (5%). The operative time to perform a urinary diversion ranged from 124 to 553 min. The total estimated blood loss ranged from 200 to 900 mL. The rate of positive surgical margins ranged from 0% to 8.1%. Early minor and major complication rates ranged from 0% to 100% and from 0% to 33%, respectively. Late minor and major complication rates ranged from 0% to 70% and from 0% to 25%, respectively. The most frequent types of ICONB are Studer “U” neobladder, Hautmann “W” neobladder, “Y” neobladder, and the Padua neobladder. Randomized studies comparing the performance of the different types of ICONB, the performance in an intra or extracorporeal manner, or the performance of an ICONB versus ICIC are lacking in the literature. To this day, there are not sufficient quality data to determine the supremacy of one technique. This manuscript represents a compendium of the most used ICONB with detailed descriptions of the technical aspects, operative and perioperative outcomes, and new consistent images of each technique.