Efficacy of 5% Dextrose Water Injection for Peripheral Entrapment Neuropathy: A Narrative Review.

Current non-surgical treatment for peripheral entrapment neuropathy is considered insignificant and unsustainable; thus, it is essential to find an alternative novel treatment. The technique of perineural injection therapy using 5% dextrose water has been progressively used to treat many peripheral entrapment neuropathies and has been proven to have outstanding effects in a few high-quality studies. Currently, the twentieth edition of Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine textbook recommends this novel injection therapy as an alternative local treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). Hence, this novel approach has become the mainstream method for treating CTS, and other studies have revealed its clinical benefit for other peripheral entrapment neuropathies. In this narrative review, we aimed to provide an insight into this treatment method and summarize the current studies on cases of peripheral entrapment neuropathy treated by this method.

Comparative analysis of the risk of radiation exposure and cost of reduced imaging intensity for surveillance of early-stage nonseminomatous germ cell tumors.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the surveillance recommendations for early-stage testis cancer and the risk of secondary malignancies due to increased radiation exposure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines 2012 and 2014 for early-stage testicular cancer, the numbers of abdominal and pelvic computed tomography scans (CTAPs) and chest radiographies were calculated, and lifetime attributable risk for secondary malignancy was estimated using Biologic Effects of Ionizing Radiation VII organ-specific model for solid organ malignancy based on the initial age of exposure. Cost was based on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' cost estimates of CTAP and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). RESULTS: The 2012 NCCN protocol uses a maximum of 17 CTAPs over 6 years, whereas 2014 guidelines suggest a maximum of 13 CTAPs. The radiation dosage in 2014 guidelines is decreased by 25% compared to the 2012 NCCN guidelines. The minimum number of CTAPs under the 2014 NCCN protocol reduced radiation dose by 38% compared to the maximum number, this compared to about 50% decrease from the 2012 NCCN guidelines. The median cost for a single CTAP with contrast is $369.30; median cost for a single MRI with contrast is $772.18. As compared to the 2012 protocol, the 2014 guidelines reduced CTAP cost by approximately 24%-54% for minimum and maximum CTAPs allowed. CONCLUSION: There is low, however nonzero, risk of secondary malignancy for surveillance in stage I testicular cancer. There is also a significant cost difference between protocols as well as between CT and MRI modalities.

A case-mix-adjusted comparison of early oncological outcomes of open and robotic prostatectomy performed by experienced high volume surgeons.

OBJECTIVE: To compare early oncological outcomes of robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) and open radical prostatectomy (ORP) performed by high volume surgeons in a contemporary cohort. METHODS: We reviewed patients who underwent radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer by high volume surgeons performing RALP or ORP. Biochemical recurrence (BCR) was defined as PSA ≥ 0.1 ng/mL or PSA ≥ 0.05 ng/mL with receipt of additional therapy. A Cox regression model was used to evaluate the association between surgical approach and BCR using a predictive model (nomogram) based on preoperative stage, grade, volume of disease and PSA. To explore the impact of differences between surgeons, multivariable analyses were repeated using surgeon in place of approach. RESULTS: Of 1454 patients included, 961 (66%) underwent ORP and 493 (34%) RALP and there were no important differences in cancer characteristics by group. Overall, 68% of patients met National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria for intermediate or high risk disease and 9% had lymph node involvement. Positive margin rates were 15% for both open and robotic groups. In a multivariate model adjusting for preoperative risk there was no significant difference in BCR rates for RALP compared with ORP (hazard ratio 0.88; 95% CI 0.56-1.39; P = 0.6). The interaction term between nomogram risk and procedure type was not statistically significant. Using NCCN risk group as the covariate in a Cox model gave similar results (hazard ratio 0.74; 95% CI 0.47-1.17; P = 0.2). The interaction term between NCCN risk and procedure type was also non-significant. Differences in BCR rates between techniques (4.1% vs 3.3% adjusted risk at 2 years) were smaller than those between surgeons (2.5% to 4.8% adjusted risk at 2 years). CONCLUSIONS: In this relatively high risk cohort of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy we found no evidence to suggest that ORP resulted in better early oncological outcomes then RALP. Oncological outcome after radical prostatectomy may be driven more by surgeon factors than surgical approach.