Malignant mesothelioma

Malignant Mesothelioma (MM) is a rare but rapidly fatal and aggressive tumor of the pleura and peritoneum with limited knowledge of its natural history. The incidence has increased in the past two decades but still it is a rare tumor. Etiology of all forms of mesothelioma is strongly associated with industrial pollutants, of which asbestos is the principal carcinogen. Mesothelioma is an insidious neoplasm arising from mesothelial surfaces i.e., pleura (65%-70%), peritoneum (30%), tunica vaginalis testis, and pericardium (1%-2%). The diagnosis of peritoneal and Pleural mesothelioma is often delayed, due to a long latent period between onset and symptoms and the common and nonspecific clinical presentation. The definite diagnosis can only be established by diagnostic laparoscopy or open surgery along with biopsy to obtain histological examination and immunocytochemical analysis. Different treatment options are available but Surgery can achieve a complete or incomplete resection and Radical resection is the preferred treatment. Chemotherapy has an important role in palliative treatment. Photodynamic therapy is also an option under trial. Patients who successfully underwent surgical resection had a considerably longer median survival as well as a significantly higher 5-year survival.

Source of Data/Study Selection: The data were collected from case reports, cross-sectional studies, Open-label studies and phase –II trials between 1973-2012.

Data Extraction: Web sites and other online resources of American college of surgeons, Medline, NCBI and Medscape resource centers were used to extract data.

Conclusion: Malignant Mesothelioma (MM) is a rare but rapidly fatal and aggressive tumor with limited knowledge of its natural history. The diagnosis of peritoneal and Pleural mesothelioma is often delayed, so level of index of suspicion must be kept high.

The outcome of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for renal pelvic stone with and without JJ stent--a comparative study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcome of Extra corporeal shockwave lithotripsy for a renal pelvic stone with and without JJ stent.

METHODS

A comparative cross sectional study was carried out at Sindh Institute of Urology and Transplantation from January 2007 to January 2008. Eighty patients with renal pelvic stone measuring 2cm +/- 2mm were selected for treatment with Extra Corporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy (ESWL). All of these patients were adults with normal renal function and had unilateral renal stones with negative urine cultures. Patients with renal failure and children were excluded. They were divided into two groups of 40 each. Group A patients underwent ESWL without a JJ stent and in Group B a JJ stent was placed before ESWL. SLX F2 electromagnetic ESWL machine was used to impart shock waves. 3000 shockwaves were given in a session. Both the groups were compared for renal colic, steinstrasse, fever, lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) emergency room visits and hospital admissions, stone clearance, number of ESWL sessions, auxilliary procedures, (percutaneous nephrostomy or ureterorenoscopy) and cost.

RESULTS

Ureteric colic occurred in 13 (32.5%) patients in group A and in 3 (7.5%) patient in group B. Steinstrasse developed in 4 (10%) patients with out JJ stent and in 3 (7.5%) patients with JJ stent. Fever was encountered in 1 (2.5%) patient in group A and in 3 (7.5%) patient in group B. Mean emergency room visits were 2.1 per patient in group A and 0.7 per patient in group B. Stone clearance occurred in 33 (82.5%) patients in group A and 31 (77.5%) in group B. In group B lower urinary tract symptoms were found in 50% versus 20% in group A. Auxillary procedure was performed in one (2.5%) patient each in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Pre ESWL JJ stenting for a 2 cm +/- 2 mm renal stone was not beneficial in terms of steinstrasse, fever, stone clearance and number of ESWL sessions. However ureteric colic was significantly less in the stented group. Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) was also significantly high in the patients having a JJ stent. The cost of the treatment doubled in the stented group which is an important factor in our country. JJ stenting does not prove to be a cost effective procedure when compared to the reduction in complications.

Treatment of ureteric calculi--use of Holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy versus pneumatic lithoclast

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of Holmium: YAG laser and pneumatic lithoclast in treating ureteric calculi.

METHODS

The study included total of 100 patients divided into two equal groups of laser lithotripsy (LL) and pneumatic lithoclast (PL). Study was conducted between September 2006 and February 2007. Inclusion criteria were patients with a ureteric stone of size 1-2 cm and negative urine culture. An x-ray KUB was mandatory. IVU and CT pyelogram were also done when required. Procedures were done under general anaesthesia after a single dose of pre-operative antibiotic. A 7.5 Fr semi rigid ureteroscope was used for ureteroscopy in all cases. Holmium: YAG laser with 365 microm wide probe was employed in laser group and frequency was set between 5 and 10 Hz at a power of 10 to 15 W. Swiss lithoclast with single or multiple fire technique was used accordingly in PL group. Postoperatively patients underwent radiography and helical CT as required at 4th week of follow up to asses stone clearance.

RESULTS

The mean patient age in LL and PL group was 38 +/- 10 and 40 +/- 10 years respectively. The male to female ratio and stone size were similar between the groups. Stone migration up in pelvicalyceal system occurred in two patients of LL group while in eight patients of PL group. JJ Stent was placed in 5(10%) patients in laser group where as 13 (26%) patients required it in pneumatic lithoclast group. Stone free rate at 4 weeks was 92% in laser group as compared to 82% in pneumatic lithoclast group. Hospital stay was more than 24 hours in 2 patients of laser group as compared to 5 patients of pneumatic lithoclast group. Complication rate was 4% in LL group whereas it was 14% in PL group.

CONCLUSION

Holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy is a superior technology compared to pneumatic lithoclast in terms of rate of stone clearance and complications, especially in upper ureteric stones.

Comparison of holmium: Yag laser and pneumatic lithoclast in percutaneous nephrolithotomy

OBJECTIVE

To compare holmium Yag laser with lithoclast in patients with renal stones undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).

METHODS

A comparative cross sectional study was performed on 60 patients undergoing PCNL. Patients with a 2.5 cm stone in renal pelvis, having preoperative negative urine culture, no coagulopathy and fit for general anaesthesia were included, pregnant females were excluded. They were randomly divided into 2 groups of 30 cases each depending on the energy source used. Group A included cases of PCNL subjected to laser treatment and group B had patients undergoing PCNL with pneumatic lithoclast. For each group duration of procedure, any per operative or postoperative complication, residual stone, duration of hospital stay and cost of each procedure were recorded.

RESULTS

The average operative time was 125.7 +/- 31.1 minutes in group A and 98.5 +/- 18.7 minutes in group B (P = 0.0001). The overall complication rate was similar in both groups being 13.3% in group A and 23.3% in group B. Residual stone was observed in 17% cases in group A and 13% cases in group B (P = 0.5). The mean postoperative hospital stay was 3.17 +/- 1.6 days in group A and 4 +/- 2.3 days in group B (P = 0.4). Cost analysis showed that the initial capital cost of equipment was 40,000 Euro in laser and 24,000 Euro in pneumatic lithoclast. However because of reuse of fiber the per procedure cost was 60 Euro in laser and 50 Euro in lithoclast group.

CONCLUSION

In our experience we found that Holmium: YAG laser and pneumatic lithoclast are both effective and safe lithotriptors for percutaneous stone removal. More operating time was required in laser, more complications encountered with pneumatic lithoclast and a high initial cost of laser. However with increasing experience with laser, more promising results are expected with this new technology. The cost can be compensated by using it in other procedures especially at a public sector hospital.