Unplanned Emergency Department Visits and Hospital Admissions Following Ureteroscopy: Do Ureteral Stents Make a Difference?

Factors associated with unplanned clinical encounters for ureteral stent-related symptoms

BACKGROUND, INTRODUCTION AND AIM

Ureteral stent-related symptoms (USRS) often result in unplanned phone calls and ER visits. We hypothesize that patient factors can be identified to predict these unplanned encounters.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Retrospective analysis of indwelling ureteral stent placements from 2014 to 2019 at a single institution by CPT code was performed. Patient demographics, discharge medications, and clinical factors were evaluated using multiple logistic regression with respect to postoperative telephone and emergency room (ER) encounters for USRS.

RESULTS

Of 374 patients, 75 (20.1%) had one or more encounters for USRS: 48 (12.8%) called the clinic and 39 (10.4%) returned to the ER. Chronic opioid use was predictive of calls to clinic and ER visits (OR 3.21 [CI 1.42-6.97], p < 0.01 and OR 3.64 [CI 1.45-8.98], p < 0.01). Survival analysis stratified by history of chronic opioid use and discharge opioid prescriptions demonstrated that opioid naïve patients receiving opioids at discharge had unplanned encounters sooner and more often [Calls p = 0.025, ER p = 0.041]), whereas patients with chronic opioid use returned to the ER sooner and more frequently when prescribed additional opioids (Calls p = 0.4, ER p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Patients with a history of chronic opioid use may experience more intense USRS or have a lower threshold to seek medical care than opioid naïve patients and tend to bypass calling the clinic for the ER. Given that none of the studied medications reduced unplanned patient contact for USRS, urologists should consider upfront definitive management of urinary obstruction when appropriate.

Tubeless Ureterorenoscopy-Our Experience Using a 120 W Laser and Dusting Technique: Postoperative Pain, Complications, and Readmissions

Introduction and Objective: Both double J-stent (DJS) and ureter catheter (UC) drainage represent routine practice following ureterorenoscopy. In select situations, a tubeless approach is possible and safe. In tubeless cases, we use a sheathless dusting technique with the Lumenis® MOSES Pulse™120 H Holmium: YAG laser. We evaluated these three drainage subgroups and compared postoperative pain, complications, and readmissions. Methods: A retrospective database of 269 consecutive patients who underwent primary ureterorenoscopy for the treatment of upper urinary tract stones between October 2018 and August 2019. The cohort was divided according to post-operative drainage as Tubeless, UC, and DJS. The decision on whether to perform post-operative drainage was by surgeon preference. Demographic and clinical parameters such as stone location, number, and burden, hydronephrosis grade, and postoperative complications (fever, acute renal failure, and the obstruction of the upper urinary tract by Stone Street) were assessed. Pain was assessed using a 0−10 Visual Analog Scale score (VAS) and the use of analgesics by dose/case in each group. Results: There were 70 (26%) tubeless, 136 (50%) UC, and 63 (24%) DJS cases. Patients drained with DJSs had a significantly higher stone burden, more severe obstruction, and prolonged operative time. Tubeless and UC-drained patients had the same stone characteristics with maximal diameters of 8.4 (6.1−12) mm and 8 (5.2−11.5) mm in comparison to the stented group, with 12 (8.6−16.6) mm, p < 0.01. The operation time was the longest in the stented group at 49 min (IQR 33−60) in comparison to the UC and tubeless groups at 32 min (23−45) and 28 min (20−40), respectively (p < 0.001). Auxiliary procedures were more prevalent in the stented group, but the overall stone-free rate was not significantly different, p = 0.285. Postoperative ER visits, readmissions, and complications were the highest in the UC-drained group, at 20% in the UC vs. 6% in the tubeless and 10% in the stented groups. Post-operative pain levels and analgesic use were significantly lower in the tubeless group with a significant reduction in opiate usage. Conclusions: A tubeless approach is safe in selected cases with fewer post-operative complications. While DJS should be considered in complex cases, UC may be omitted in straightforward cases since it does not appear to reduce immediate postoperative complications. Those fitted for tubeless procedures had improved postoperative outcomes, facilitating outpatient approach to upper urinary tract stone treatment and patient satisfaction.

Quality of life impact and recovery after ureteroscopy and stent insertion: insights from daily surveys in STENTS

BACKGROUND

Our objective was to describe day-to-day evolution and variations in patient-reported stent-associated symptoms (SAS) in the STudy to Enhance uNderstanding of sTent-associated Symptoms (STENTS), a prospective multicenter observational cohort study, using multiple instruments with conceptual overlap in various domains.

METHODS

In a nested cohort of the STENTS study, the initial 40 participants having unilateral ureteroscopy (URS) and stent placement underwent daily assessment of self-reported measures using the Brief Pain Inventory short form, Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System measures for pain severity and pain interference, the Urinary Score of the Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire, and Symptoms of Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction Research Network Symptom Index. Pain intensity, pain interference, urinary symptoms, and bother were obtained preoperatively, daily until stent removal, and at postoperative day (POD) 30.

RESULTS

The median age was 44 years (IQR 29,58), and 53% were female. The size of the dominant stone was 7.5 mm (IQR 5,11), and 50% were located in the kidney. There was consistency among instruments assessing similar concepts. Pain intensity and urinary symptoms increased from baseline to POD 1 with apparent peaks in the first 2 days, remained elevated with stent in situ, and varied widely among individuals. Interference due to pain, and bother due to urinary symptoms, likewise demonstrated high individual variability.

CONCLUSIONS

This first study investigating daily SAS allows for a more in-depth look at the lived experience after URS and the impact on quality of life. Different instruments measuring pain intensity, pain interference, and urinary symptoms produced consistent assessments of patients' experiences. The overall daily stability of pain and urinary symptoms after URS was also marked by high patient-level variation, suggesting an opportunity to identify characteristics associated with severe SAS after URS.

Disparities in Kidney Stone Disease: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE

We reviewed the available evidence regarding health disparities in kidney stone disease to identify knowledge gaps in this area.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was conducted using PubMed®, Embase® and Scopus® limited to articles published in English from 1971 to 2020. Articles were selected based on their relevance to disparities in kidney stone disease among adults in the United States.

RESULTS

Several large epidemiological studies suggest disproportionate increases in incidence and prevalence of kidney stone disease among women as well as Black and Hispanic individuals in the United States, whereas other studies of comparable size do not report racial and ethnic demographics. Numerous articles describe disparities in imaging utilization, metabolic workup completion, analgesia, surgical intervention, stone burden at presentation, surgical complications, followup, and quality of life based on race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status and place of residence. Differences in urinary parameters based on race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status may be explained by both dietary and physiological factors. All articles assessed had substantial risk of selection bias and confounding.

CONCLUSIONS

Health disparities are present in many aspects of kidney stone disease. Further research should focus not only on characterization of these disparities but also on interventions to reduce or eliminate them.

Striking a balance: outcomes of short-term Mono-J placement following ureterorenoscopy

To evaluate factors affecting the outcomes of short-term Mono-J insertion for 6 h following ureteroscopic stone removal. Patients treated with a Mono-J for 6 h after ureterorenoscopy and stone removal were analysed. FaST 1 and 2 (Fast Track Stent Studies), two consecutive single academic centre studies, were conducted between August 2014 and April 2018. In each study, we randomized patients with renal or ureteral calculi to two groups before ureterorenoscopy. FaST 1 compared a Mono-J insertion for 6 h versus Double-J insertion for 3–5 days after ureterorenoscopy. FaST 2 compared a Mono-J insertion to a tubeless procedure in the same clinical setting. All patients were pre-stented for 3–5 days before URS. The study endpoint was stent-related symptoms as assessed by a validated questionnaire (USSQ). Results were stratified by clinical parameters, stone characteristics and operation details. 108 of 156 initially randomized patients undergoing ureterorenoscopy were included. USSQ scores covering the time 3–5 weeks after stone removal showed a significantly reduced urinary symptoms and pain index compared to the scores before ureterorenoscopy. USSQ results before and after stone removal did not correlate with stone size or operation time and did not differ significantly depending on stone localization, the treating endourologist, or ureterorenoscopic device used (p > 0.05). Six patients (5%) required reintervention. Following secondary ureterorenoscopy and ureteral drainage with a Mono-J for 6 h, quality of life is independent of stone size and localization, operation time, the treating endourologist, and the URS device used.

Novel Use of a Modified Triangular Prismatic Double-J Stent for 2- to 3-cm Renal Stones after One-Stage Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery

OBJECTIVES

To initially evaluate the outcomes of the modified triangular prismatic double-J (DJ) stent in the management of 2- to 3-cm renal stones after one-stage retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS).

METHODS

Patients with 2- to 3-cm renal stones who underwent one-stage RIRS with indwelling DJ stents were retrospectively evaluated. Eighty-eight patients who were placed the triangular prismatic DJ stents and 64 patients who received standard DJ stents were randomly included. The clinical characteristics and intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of the 2 groups were compared and analyzed.

RESULTS

The 2 groups had similar baseline characteristics. The urinary symptom score and pain score did not differ between groups (p > 0.05). The residual fragments of the 2 groups were similar 1 day after operation (p = 0.134). There was no significant difference in residual fragments in the lower calyx between groups at the time of stent removal (p = 0.834). The patients in the modified group had better spontaneous passage of residual fragments in the nonlower calyx than those in the standard group during the 2 weeks with the stents (p = 0.005). Fewer patients in the modified group had residual fragments (>4 mm) in the nonlower calyx (p = 0.026) and ureter (p = 0.010) than the patients with standard stents at the time of stent removal.

CONCLUSION

The indwelling triangular prismatic DJ stent is a safe and efficient treatment method. Patients with these stents had better spontaneous residual fragment passage than those with the standard DJ stents.

Transient stent placement versus tubeless procedure after ureteroscopy retrograde surgery stone extraction (Fast Track Stent study 2): A randomized prospective evaluation

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether in pre-stented patients undergoing ureteroscopic stone removal (ureteroscopy retrograde surgery) a tubeless procedure provides a better outcome compared with short-term (6 h) ureteral stenting using an external ureteral catheter.

METHODS

In this single academic center study (Fast Track Stent study 2), carried out between May 2016 and April 2018, 121 patients with renal or ureteral calculi were initially treated with double-J insertion. Before secondary ureteroscopy retrograde surgery, patients were prospectively randomized into two groups: tubeless versus ureteral catheter insertion for 6 h after ureteroscopy retrograde surgery. Exclusion criteria were acute urinary tract infection, solitary kidney or stone diameter >25 mm. Study end-points were stent-related symptoms assessed by a validated questionnaire (ureteral stent symptom questionnaire), administered both before and 4 weeks after surgery. Numerical ureteral stent symptom questionnaire scores were compared using the Mann-Whitney-U-test. The level of significance was defined as P < 0.05.

RESULTS

Ureteroscopy retrograde surgery procedures carried out by 13 surgeons resulted in >90% stone removal in all patients (n = 121), with a mean operation time of 19.9 versus 18.0 min for ureteral catheter versus tubeless, respectively (P = 0.37). Patient groups did not differ significantly in their ureteral stent symptom questionnaire scores (urinary index P = 0.24; pain index P = 0.35). Patients showed a significant preference for tubeless procedure over ureteral catheter reinsertion (Question GQ P < 0.0001). The reintervention rate was 13.3% for the tubeless procedure (n = 8) and 1.6% for the ureteral catheter group (n = 1), respectively (P = 0.034).

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term ureteral catheter and no stent insertion after ureteroscopy retrograde surgery stone extraction in pre-stented patients result in comparable quality of life. However, the reintervention rate is higher for tubeless procedures.

Pneumatic vs laser lithotripsy for mid-ureteric stones: Clinical and cost effectiveness results of a prospective trial in a developing country

Objective

To compare the management of large ureteric stones (>10 mm) with ureterorenoscopy (URS) and laser or pneumatic lithotripsy, and their associated costs.

Patients and methods

Our prospective study followed the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki and included 101 patients with large mid-ureteric stones eligible for URS and lithotripsy, and was conducted between January 2018 and August 2019. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: Group 1 had laser lithotripsy, while the Group 2 had lithotripsy using a pneumatic energy source.

Results

Operative time was significantly longer in cases using pneumatic lithotripsy (P < 0.001). The stone-free rate (SFR) on the first postoperative day was 94% and 92.5% for laser and pneumatic lithotripsy respectively, and there were no statistically significant differences in terms of early (day 1) or late (day 30) SFRs between the groups. Complications were classified according to the Clavien–Dindo Grading System, all complications were Grade <III, with no statistically significant difference between the groups (P = 0.742). The use of pneumatic lithotripsy had lower treatment costs. The number of auxiliary procedures required to reach a stone-free status was statistically equivalent in both groups.

Conclusion

The type of lithotripsy did not affect the SFR or complications. However, laser lithotripsy was much more expensive than pneumatic lithotripsy.

Abbreviations

KUB: plain abdominal radiograph of the kidneys, ureters and bladder; SFR: stone-free rate; SWL: shockwave lithotripsy; URS: Ureterorenoscopy; US: ultrasonography

Predictors of emergency department attendance following ureterorenoscopy for urolithiasis

BACKGROUND

We sought to determine the rate of emergency department (ED) attendance for complications after ureterorenoscopy (URS) for stone disease and to identify risk factors for ED attendance after URS.

METHODS

An analysis of all patients undergoing URS over 12 months at a single institution was performed. Patient demographics, preoperative and intraoperative variables associated with postoperative complications and subsequent ED attendance were collected. Logistic regression analyses were performed to determine predictors of URS complications presenting to ED.

RESULTS

In total, 202 ureteroscopies were performed on 142 patients for urolithiasis. The mean age was 50.73 ± 13.93 and 66% were male. The incidence of re-presentation to ED was 14.8% (n = 30). Patients presented with postoperative pain (n = 10; 4.95%), pyrexia (n = 9; 4.46%), urinary tract infection (UTI) (n = 7, 3.47%), haematuria (n = 3, 1.49%) and urosepsis (n = 1; 0.5%). Significant risk factors for ED attendance included preoperative stent dwell time > 30 days (P = 0.004), recently treated positive preoperative urine culture (P < 0.0001), stone size ≥ 13 mm (P = 0.043), stone location mid-ureter (P = 0.036) and female gender (P = 0.005). The following factors did not predict ED attendance, stent omission, access sheath utilization and operation duration.

CONCLUSION

Risk factors for ED attendance after URS include prolonged pre-stent dwell time, stone size ≥ 13 mm, treatment for a positive preoperative urine culture, mid-ureteric stone location and female gender. Urologists should be aware of these findings to decrease the risk of emergency re-presentation after elective URS surgery.

Postoperative Emergency Department Visits After Urinary Stone Surgery: Variation Based on Surgical Modality

Introduction: Urinary stone disease is responsible for more than 1 million emergency department (ED) visits annually. There is increasing regulatory and cost pressure to reduce unplanned episodes of care, particularly after elective surgery. However, the frequency of ED visits in the early postoperative period after different modalities of stone surgery is not well characterized. We aimed at describing rates of postoperative ED visits after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), ureteroscopy (URS), and extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL). Methods: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) state databases for Florida (2010-2012), Iowa (2010-2012), California (2010-2011), and New York (2006-2012) were used to identify patients undergoing PCNL, URS, or SWL. The HCUP State Emergency Department Database was used to identify postoperative ED visits in the first 30 days after surgery. Rates of postoperative ED visits were compared across surgery types with chi-square and multivariate logistic regression. Results: A total of 321,899 patients undergoing stone surgery during the study period were identified, including 151,006 (46.9%) URS, 128,040 (39.8%) SWL, and 42,853 (13.3%) PCNL. PCNL had the highest rate of 30-day postop ED visits (13.2%), followed by URS (10.6%) and SWL (7.5%; p < 0.0001). On multivariate logistic regression adjusting for baseline clinical and sociodemographic characteristics, both PCNL (odds ratio [OR] 1.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.56-1.69) and URS (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.30-1.37) were independently associated with increased risk of postop ED visit when compared with SWL. Conclusion: Among kidney stone surgeries, PCNL has the highest rate of 30-day postoperative ED visits, whereas SWL has the lowest. Postoperative ED visits are an important outcome for both patients and surgeons, and observed differences across surgical modalities should be incorporated into the preoperative shared decision-making process.

Reprint - Ureteral stent vs. no ureteral stent for ureteroscopy in the management of renal and ureteral calculi: A Cochrane review

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to assess the effects of postoperative ureteral stent placement after uncomplicated ureteroscopy.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search with no restrictions on publication language or status up to February 1, 2019. We only included randomized trials. Two review authors independently examined full-text reports, identified relevant studies, assessed the eligibility of studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model and assessed the certainty of the evidence according to GRADE.

RESULTS

We included 23 studies with 2656 randomized patients. Primary outcomes: It is uncertain whether stenting reduces the number of unplanned return visits (very low certainty of evidence [CoE]). Pain on the day of surgery is probably similar (mean difference [MD] 0.32; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.13-0.78; moderate CoE). Pain on postoperative days 1-3 may show little to no difference (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.25; 95% CI -0.32-0.82; low CoE). It is uncertain whether stented patients experience more pain on postoperative days 4-30 (very low CoE). Stenting may result in little to no difference in the need for secondary interventions (risk ratio [RR] 1.15; 95% CI 0.39-3.33; low CoE).

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

We are uncertain whether stenting reduces the need for narcotics and reduces ureteral stricture rates up to 90 days (very low CoE). Rates of hospital admission may be slightly reduced (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.32-1.55; low CoE). This review was limited to patients in whom ureteroscopy was deemed 'uncomplicated.' In addition, time intervals for the grouping for the reported degree of pain were established post-hoc. The CoE for most outcomes was rated as low or very low for methodological reasons.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings of this review illustrate the tradeoffs of risks and benefits faced by urologists and their patients when it comes to decision-making about stent placement after uncomplicated ureteroscopy for stone disease.

Opiate Exposure and Predictors of Increased Opiate Use After Ureteroscopy

Objective: Kidney stone formers are at risk for opioid dependence. The aim of this study is to describe opiate exposure and determine predictors of prolonged opiate use among kidney stone formers after surgery. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review was performed among patients who underwent ureteroscopy for upper tract stone disease. Prescription data were ascertained from a statewide prescribing database. Demographic data and surgical factors were collected from the electronic medical record. Predictors of additional postsurgery prescriptions filled within 30 days and persistent opiate use 60 days after ureteroscopy were determined. Results: Among 208 patients, 127 (61%) had received preoperative opiate prescriptions within 30 days before surgery. Overall, 12% (n = 25) of patients required an additional opiate prescription within 30 days after ureteroscopy, and 7% (n = 14) of patients continued to use opiate medications more than 60 days postoperatively. Patients continuing to use opiates long-term were not chronic opiate users. For both outcomes, preoperative opiate exposure, including number of prescriptions, days prescribed, and unique providers had significant associations (all p < 0.05). Additionally, younger age (p = 0.049) was associated with obtaining an additional opiate prescription within 30 days. Lower BMI (p = 0.02) and higher ASA score (p = 0.03) were predictors of continued opiate use more than 60 days after ureteroscopy. Conclusions: The majority of stone formers have had opiate exposure before surgery, often from multiple providers. Approximately 1 in 8 stone formers who undergo ureteroscopy require additional opiate prescriptions within 30 days. A small but significant population receive opiates beyond the immediate postoperative period.

Ureteral stent versus no ureteral stent for ureteroscopy in the management of renal and ureteral calculi

BACKGROUND

Ureteroscopy combined with laser stone fragmentation and basketing is a common approach for managing renal and ureteral stones. This procedure is associated with some degree of ureteral trauma. Ureteral trauma may lead to swelling, ureteral obstruction, and flank pain and may require subsequent interventions such as hospital admission or secondary ureteral stent placement. To prevent such issues, urologists often place temporary ureteral stents prophylactically, but the value of doing so remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of postoperative ureteral stent placement after uncomplicated ureteroscopy.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases (the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science), trials registries, other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings, up to 01 February 2019. We applied no restrictions on publication language or status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included trials in which researchers randomised participants undergoing uncomplicated ureteroscopy to placement of a ureteral stent versus no ureteral stent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data from the included studies. We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model. We rated the certainty of evidence (CoE) according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Primary outcomesStenting may slightly reduce the number of unplanned return visits (16 trials with 1970 participants; very low CoE), but we are very uncertain of this finding.Pain on the day of surgery as measured on a visual analogue scale (scale 0 to 10; higher values reflect more pain) is probably similar (mean difference (MD) 0.32 higher, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13 lower to 0.78 higher; 4 trials with 346 participants; moderate CoE). Pain on postoperative days 1 to 3 may show little to no difference (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.25 higher, 95% CI 0.32 lower to 0.82 higher; 8 trials with 683 participants; low CoE). On postoperative days 4 to 30, stented participants may experience more pain (8 trials with 903 participants; very low CoE), but we are very uncertain of this finding.Stenting may result in little to no difference in the need for secondary interventions (risk ratio (RR) 1.15, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.33; 10 studies with 1435 participants; low CoE); this corresponds to three more interventions per 1000 participants (95% CI 13 fewer to 48 more).Secondary outcomesStenting may reduce the need for narcotics (7 trials with 830 participants; very low CoE), but we are very uncertain of this finding.Rates of urinary tract infection (UTI) up to 90 days are probably not substantially different (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.51; 10 trials with 1207 participants; moderate CoE); this corresponds to three fewer infections per 1000 participants (95% CI 23 fewer to 29 more).Ureteral stricture rates up to 90 days may be slightly reduced (14 trials with 1625 participants; very low CoE), but we are very uncertain of this finding.Rates of hospital admission may be slightly reduced (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.55; 13 studies with 1647 participants; low CoE). This corresponds to 15 fewer admissions per 1000 participants (95% CI 33 fewer to 27 more).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Findings of this review illustrate the trade-offs of risks and benefits faced by urologists and their patients when it comes to decision-making about stent placement after uncomplicated ureteroscopy for stone disease. We noted that both desirable and undesirable effects were small in absolute terms, with findings based mostly on low and very low CoE. The main issues reducing our confidence in research findings were study limitations (mostly risk of performance and detection bias) and imprecision. We were unable to conduct any of the preplanned subgroup analyses, in particular those based on stone size, stone location, and use of ureteral dilation, which may be important effect modifiers. Given the importance of this question, higher-quality and sufficiently large trials are needed to better inform decision-making.

Updates in endourological management of urolithiasis

Urinary stone disease, or urolithiasis, is a very common disease with increasing prevalence and incidence. With the advancement of endoscopic techniques, the treatment outcomes of ureteroscopy (or transureteral lithotripsy) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy are continuously improving. In recent years, there have been many new developments in the field, including new endoscopy design, more effective auxiliary tools, improvement in treatment protocols, introduction of robotic technology, combining both ureteroscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery or transureteral lithotripsy-assisted percutaneous nephrolithotomy), improvement in laser technology, and so on. All these new inputs will further improve the treatment efficacy and safety of the procedures, thus benefiting our patients. In the present review, we briefly go through the main steps of ureteroscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy, with a concise description and application of these new advances.