Chondroprotection in Models of Cartilage Injury by Raising the Temperature and Osmolarity of Irrigation Solutions.

Objectives During arthroscopic or open joint surgery, articular cartilage may be subjected to mechanical insults by accident or design. These may lead to chondrocyte death, cartilage breakdown and posttraumatic osteoarthritis. We have shown that increasing osmolarity of routinely used normal saline protected chondrocytes against injuries that may occur during orthopedic surgery. Often several liters of irrigation fluid are used during an orthopedic procedure, which is usually kept at room temperature, but is sometimes chilled. Here, we compared the effect of normal and hyperosmolar saline solution at different temperatures on chondrocyte viability following cartilage injury using in vitro and in vivo models of scalpel-induced injury. Design Cartilage injury was induced in bovine osteochondral explants and the patellar groove of rats in vivo by a single pass of a scalpel blade in the presence of normal saline (300 mOsm) or hyperosmolar saline solution (600 mOsm, sucrose addition) at 4°C, 21°C, or 37°C. Chondrocytes were fluorescently labeled and visualized by confocal microscopy to assess cell death. Results Hyperosmolar saline reduced scalpel-induced chondrocyte death in both bovine and rat cartilage by ~50% at all temperatures studied (4°C, 21°C, 37°C; P < 0.05). Raising temperature of both irrigation solutions to 37°C reduced scalpel-induced cell death ( P < 0.05). Conclusions Increasing the osmolarity of normal saline and raising the temperature of the irrigation solutions to 37°C reduced chondrocyte death associated with scalpel-induced injury in both in vitro and in vivo cartilage injury models. A hyperosmolar saline irrigation solution at 37°C may protect cartilage by decreasing the risk of chondrocyte death during mechanical injury.

Primary SWL Is an Efficient and Cost-Effective Treatment for Lower Pole Renal Stones Between 10 and 20 mm in Size: A Large Single Center Study.

INTRODUCTION: To assess the clinical features, outcomes, complications, and cost-effectiveness of shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), flexible ureterorenoscopy (FURS), and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the treatment of lower pole (LP) stones (10-20 mm) in a large tertiary referral center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients treated for solitary LP stones (10-20 mm) between 2008 and 2013 were identified from a prospective database. SWL was used as primary treatment in all cases (following a stone multidisciplinary team assessment), with FURS and PCNL reserved for SWL contraindications, failure, or patient choice. "Success" was defined as stone free and/or clinically insignificant stone fragments (≤3 mm) at 1 and 3 months follow-up. Effect of anatomy on SWL success was determined from using CT images and regression analysis. Average cost per treatment modality (including additional second-line treatments) was calculated for each group using the National Health Service England 2014/15 National Tariff Healthcare Resource Group codes. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-five patients were included (mean age 54.9; median stone size 12 mm). One hundred ninety-eight (88%), 21 (9.3%), and 6 (2.7%) patients underwent SWL, FURS, and PCNL as primary treatments, respectively, for median stone sizes of 12, 12, and 20 mm. Overall success rates were 82.8%, 76.1%, and 66.7%, respectively (p < 0.05). Sixty-three percent of patients undergoing primary SWL were effectively treated after one session. Anatomical analysis determined infundibulopelvic angle and infundibular length to be significantly different in patients effectively treated with SWL (p = 0.04). The average cost per treatment modality was also significantly lower for SWL (£750) than for FURS (£1261) or PCNL (£2658) (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: SWL is both an efficacious and cost-effective primary treatment for patients with solitary LP stones (10-20 mm). The majority of patients can be effectively treated with primary SWL in a dedicated stone center, with the benefits of a short length of stay, low complication, and auxiliary treatment rates. The referral of such patients to high-volume lithotripsy centers with demonstrable outcomes should be given due consideration.