Development and Initial Evaluation of a Cost-Effective Force Sensor for Ureteroscopic Application.

PURPOSE: Retrograde intrarenal surgery is the gold-standard treatment for most kidney stones. During ureteroscopy, ureteral access sheath insertion at forces greater than 8.0 Newtons risks high-grade ureteral injury. To monitor force, our institution utilizes a unique, Bluetooth equipped device (i.e., the University of California - Irvine Force Sensor). Given the unique nature of the force sensor, we sought to develop an inexpensive and accessible force sensor based on Boyle's Law and the specific amount of force required to compress an occluded 1.0 mL syringe. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated three brands of 1.0 mL syringes. After setting the plunger at 1.0 mL, the syringe was occluded, and the syringe plunger was compressed. The syringe volume was recorded when the applied force on the plunger reached 4.0 N, 6.0 N, and 8.0 N. Multiple trials were performed to assess reliability and reproducibility. A method for applying this clinically was also developed. RESULTS: The precise force thresholds identified for a 1.0 mL Luer-Lok™ Syringe (Becton Dickinson, Franklin Lakes, NJ) were 0.30 mL for 4.00 N, 0.20 mL for 6.00 N, and 0.15 mL for 8.00 N. The 1.0 mL Tuberculin Syringe and 1.0 mL Luer Slip Syringe were less precise, but compression from 1.0 mL to 0.40 mL, 0.25 mL and 0.20 mL corresponded to force sensor readings that did not exceed 4.00 N, 6.00 N, and 8.00 N, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Based on volume changes, 4.00 N, 6.00 N, and 8.00 N of force can be reliably and reproducibly achieved using an occluded 1.0 mL syringe.

Cytoreductive radical prostatectomy versus no local treatment in patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

Introduction: Prostate cancer is one of the most frequent cancers in Chile, with 8157 new cases in 2020. Worldwide, 5 to 10% of men have metastatic disease at diagnosis, and androgen deprivation therapy with or without chemotherapy is the standard of care for these patients. The use of local treatment in this setting has no formal recommendation due to the lack of high-quality evidence. Some retrospective studies have sought to elucidate the benefit of surgery on the primary tumor in the setting of metastatic disease since it has been proven to be an effective local treatment for other metastatic malignant diseases. Despite these efforts, the benefit of cytoreductive radical prostatectomy as local treatment in these patients remains unclear. Methods: We searched Epistemonikos, the largest database of systematic reviews in health, which is maintained by screening multiple information sources, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane, among others. We extracted data from systematic reviews, reanalyzed data from primary studies, conducted a meta-analysis, and generated a summary results table using the GRADE approach. Results and conclusions: We identified 12 systematic reviews, including seven studies in total, none of which was a trial. Only six of those seven primary studies were used in the results summary. Despite the lack of high-quality evidence, the results summary shows the benefits of performing surgery on the primary tumor in terms of all-cause mortality, cancer-specific mortality, and disease progression. There was also a potential benefit in local complications related to the progression of the primary tumor, supporting the implementation of this intervention in patients with metastatic disease. The absence of formal recommendations highlights the need to evaluate the benefits of surgery on a case-by-case basis, presenting the available evidence to patients for a shared decision-making process and considering future local complications that could be difficult to manage.

Prostatectomía radical citorreductora comparado a no realizar tratamiento local en pacientes con cáncer de próstata metastásico / Cytoreductive radical prostatectomy versus no local treatment in patients with metastatic prostate cancer

Introducción El cáncer de próstata es uno de los cánceres más frecuentes en Chile, con 8157 nuevos casos en 2020. A nivel mundial, 5 a 10% de los hombres presentan metástasis al diagnóstico, y la terapia de deprivación androgénica con o sin quimioterapia es el estándar de cuidado para estos pacientes. El uso de tratamiento local en este contexto tiene una recomendación formal debido a la falta de evi-dencia de alta calidad. Algunos estudios retrospectivos han intentado dilucidar el beneficio de la cirugía sobre el tumor primario en el contexto de la enfermedad metastásica, ya que se ha demostrado que es un tratamiento local eficaz para otras neoplasias metastá-sicas. A pesar de estos esfuerzos, el beneficio de la prostatectomía radical citorreductora como tratamiento local en estos pacientes sigue sin estar claro. Métodos Se realizó una búsqueda en Epistemonikos, la mayor base de datos de revisiones sistemáticas en salud, que se mantiene mediante el cribado de múltiples fuentes de información, incluyendo MEDLINE, EMBASE y Cochrane, entre otras. Se extrajeron los datos de las revisiones sistemáticas, se volvieron a analizar los datos de los estudios primarios, se realizó un metanálisis y se generó una tabla de resumen de resultados utilizando el enfoque GRADE. Resultados y conclusiones Se identificaron 12 revisiones sistemáticas, que incluían siete estudios primarios en total, ninguno de los cuales era un ensayo alea-torizado controlado. Sólo seis de esos siete estudios primarios se utilizaron en el resumen de resultados. A pesar de la falta de evi-dencia de alta calidad, los resultados de este resumen muestran los beneficios de realizar la cirugía en el tumor primario en términos de mortalidad por cualquier causas, mortalidad específica por cáncer y progresión de la enfermedad. También se observó un bene-ficio potencial en las complicaciones locales relacionadas con la progresión del tumor primario, lo que apoya la realización de esta intervención en pacientes con enfermedad metastásica. La ausencia de recomendaciones formales subraya la necesidad de evaluar los beneficios de la cirugía caso por caso, presentando la evidencia disponibles a los pacientes para un proceso de toma de decisiones compartido, teniendo en cuenta las futuras complicaciones locales que podrían ser difíciles de manejar.

Introduction Prostate cancer is one of the most frequent cancers in Chile, with 8157 new cases in 2020. Worldwide, 5 to 10% of men have metastatic disease at diagnosis, and androgen deprivation therapy with or without chemotherapy is the standard of care for these patients. The use of local treatment in this setting has no formal recommendation due to the lack of high- quality evidence. Some retrospective studies have sought to elucidate the benefit of surgery on the primary tumor in the setting of metastatic disease since it has been proven to be an effective local treatment for other metastatic malignant diseases. Despite these efforts, the benefit of cytoreductive radical prostatectomy as local treatment in these patients remains unclear. Methods We searched Epistemonikos, the largest database of systematic reviews in health, which is main-tained by screening multiple information sources, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane, among others. We extracted data from systematic reviews, reanalyzed data from primary studies, conducted a meta- analysis, and generated a summary results table using the GRADE approach. Results and conclusions We identified 12 systematic reviews, including seven studies in total, none of which was a trial. Only six of those seven primary studies were used in the results summary. Despite the lack of high- quality evidence, the results summary shows the benefits of performing surgery on the primary tumor in terms of all- cause mortality, cancer- specific mortality, and disease progression. There was also a potential benefit in local complications related to the progression of the prima-ry tumor, supporting the implementation of this intervention in patients with metastatic disease. The absence of formal recommendations highlights the need to evaluate the benefits of surgery on a case- by- case basis, presenting the available evidence to patients for a shared decision- making process and considering future local complications that could be difficult to manage.