MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a study involving LMS PCI coronary lesions using the Synergy Megatron DES. An IVUS protocol using predefined optimisation targets to evaluate for stent malapposition, longitudinal stent deformation, optimal stent expansion >90% of reference lumen and appropriate distal landing zone was used in all cases. The primary end-point was procedural success, defined by successful stent implantation with <30% residual stenosis. The secondary end-point was in-hospital and 30-day major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE).
RESULTS: Eight patients with significant LMS stenosis were successfully treated with the Megatron stent. The primary end-point was achieved in all patients. There were no cases of stent malapposition or longitudinal stent deformation, one case did not have optimal LMS stent expansion and one case did not have an appropriate distal landing zone. IVUS optimisation criteria were met in 6 (75%) cases. There were no complications of coronary dissection, slow or no reflow, stent thrombosis or vessel perforation. None of the patients suffered in-hospital or 30-day MACE. The average LMS MLD at baseline was 2.1 ± 0.1mm and the post-PCI LMS MLD was 4.0 ± 0.5mm, with a significant acute luminal gain of 1.9 ± 0.7mm (p<0.01). A post-PCI MSA of 17 ± 3.9 mm2 was numerically superior compared to those documented in other LMS PCI trials.
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates low rates of shortterm major adverse cardiovascular events among patients with LMS PCI using the Megatron stents. It highlights the usefulness of IVUS-guided optimisation in LMS PCI. With the use of intravascular imaging, the new generation stent technology can improve the treatment of large proximal vessels and PCI of LMS lesions.
METHODS: Formulation of the guidelines was based on the best scientific evidence available. The RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology (RAM) was used. Panellists recruited comprised experts in surgery, interventional EUS, interventional radiology and oncology from 11 countries. Between June 2014 and October 2016, the panellists met in meetings to discuss and vote on the clinical scenarios for each of the interventional EUS procedures in question.
RESULTS: A total of 15 statements on EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst, 15 statements on EUS-guided biliary drainage, 12 statements on EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage and 14 statements on EUS-guided celiac plexus ablation were formulated. The statements addressed the indications for the procedures, technical aspects, pre- and post-procedural management, management of complications, and competency and training in the procedures. All statements except one were found to be appropriate. Randomised studies to address clinical questions in a number of aspects of the procedures are urgently required.
CONCLUSIONS: The current guidelines on interventional EUS procedures are the first published by an endoscopic society. These guidelines provide an in-depth review of the current evidence and standardise the management of the procedures.
METHODS: Shear wave elastography assessments were performed in 75 CKD patients who underwent renal biopsy. The SWE-derived estimates of the tissue Young's modulus (YM), given as kilopascals (kPa), were measured. YM was correlated to patients' renal histological scores, broadly categorized into glomerular, tubulointerstitial and vascular scores.
RESULTS: Young's modulus correlates significantly with tubulointerstitial score (ρ = 0.442, P
METHODS: ALS patients were prospectively recruited. Muscle fasciculation (≥2 over 30-seconds, examined in biceps brachii-brachialis (BB), brachioradialis, tibialis anterior and vastus medialis) and nerve cross-sectional area (CSA) (median, ulnar, tibial, fibular nerve) were evaluated through NMUS. Ultrasound parameters were correlated with clinical data, including revised ALS Functional Rating Scale (ALSFRS-R) progression at one year. A predictive model was constructed to differentiate fast progressors (ALSFRS-R decline ≥ 1/month) from non-fast progressors.
RESULTS: 40 ALS patients were recruited. Three parameters emerged as strong predictors of fast progressors: (i) ALSFRS-R slope at time of NMUS (p = 0.041), (ii) BB fasciculation count (p = 0.027) and (iii) proximal to distal median nerve CSA ratio
METHOD: s. A prospective cohort observational study was performed on patients who underwent prostate biopsy under LA. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was used during the procedure. International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS) and International Index of Erectile dysfunction (IIEF) were assessed before the procedure and in 14 days after the procedure. Complication for each procedure was recorded.
RESULT: A total of 128 patients with 64 patients for each group underwent prostate biopsy by TP and TR under LA. TP targeted biopsy group had comparable pain scores to those who underwent the procedure using the TR routes. The median pain score for the TP group was 2 and TR was 3, (IQR=2, range 0-10 for both groups)with no significant pain difference between both groups (P=0.48). Furthermore, there was no significant difference in urinary function(p=0.68) and sexual function (p=0.19) between the two groups post-procedure. Both groups have similar rates of complications, with no significant difference observed. Urinary tract infection incidents that did occur were rare and did not significantly differ between the groups (p=0.21). None of the patients experienced sepsis postoperatively. AUR was reported in both groups, slightly higher with 9.4%(N=6) in the TP group and 6.3%(N=4) in the TR group however no significant difference(p=0.112) was noted. Haematuria is common in both groups with TP (66%) and TR (59%) but self-limiting with Clavien-Dindo grade I without significant difference (p=0.589).
CONCLUSION: Our results showed that both Transperineal and transrectal approaches have similar tolerability with no significant difference in functional outcome or complications. Further studies are mandatory to verify our results.
METHODS: Forty-seven participants were recruited via convenient sampling during a RA workshop for novice practitioners. They were divided into the N or B group and then crossover to experience using both Blue Phantom and NeedleTrainer model. Time-to-reach-target, first-pass success rate, and complication rate were assessed, while the learning and confidence scores were rated using six-item and three-item questionnaires, respectively, via a 5-point Likert scale.
RESULTS: Blue Phantom model has a longer time-to-target as compared to the NeedleTrainer model (16 ± 8 vs 8 ± 3 s, p