10 research outputs found

    Male Oxidative Stress Infertility (MOSI): Proposed Terminology and Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Idiopathic Male Infertility

    Get PDF
    Despite advances in the field of male reproductive health, idiopathic male infertility, in which a man has altered semen characteristics without an identifiable cause and there is no female factor infertility, remains a challenging condition to diagnose and manage. Increasing evidence suggests that oxidative stress (OS) plays an independent role in the etiology of male infertility, with 30% to 80% of infertile men having elevated seminal reactive oxygen species levels. OS can negatively affect fertility via a number of pathways, including interference with capacitation and possible damage to sperm membrane and DNA, which may impair the sperm’s potential to fertilize an egg and develop into a healthy embryo. Adequate evaluation of male reproductive potential should therefore include an assessment of sperm OS. We propose the term Male Oxidative Stress Infertility, or MOSI, as a novel descriptor for infertile men with abnormal semen characteristics and OS, including many patients who were previously classified as having idiopathic male infertility. Oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) can be a useful clinical biomarker for the classification of MOSI, as it takes into account the levels of both oxidants and reductants (antioxidants). Current treatment protocols for OS, including the use of antioxidants, are not evidence-based and have the potential for complications and increased healthcare-related expenditures. Utilizing an easy, reproducible, and cost-effective test to measure ORP may provide a more targeted, reliable approach for administering antioxidant therapy while minimizing the risk of antioxidant overdose. With the increasing awareness and understanding of MOSI as a distinct male infertility diagnosis, future research endeavors can facilitate the development of evidence-based treatments that target its underlying cause

    The Neurostimulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC)®: recommendations for spinal cord stimulation long-term outcome optimization and salvage therapy

    No full text
    Introduction: The International Neuromodulation Society (INS) has recognized a need to establish best practices for optimizing implantable devices and salvage when ideal outcomes are not realized. This group has established the Neurostimulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC)® to offer guidance on matters needed for both our members and the broader community of those affected by neuromodulation devices. Materials and Methods: The executive committee of the INS nominated faculty for this NACC® publication on the basis of expertise, publications, and career work on the issue. In addition, the faculty was chosen in consideration of diversity and inclusion of different career paths and demographic categories. Once chosen, the faculty was asked to grade current evidence and along with expert opinion create consensus recommendations to address the lapses in information on this topic. Results: The NACC® group established informative and authoritative recommendations on the salvage and optimization of care for those with indwelling devices. The recommendations are based on evidence and expert opinion and will be expected to evolve as new data are generated for each topic. Conclusions: NACC® guidance should be considered for any patient with less-than-optimal outcomes with a stimulation device implanted for treating chronic pain. Consideration should be given to these consensus points to salvage a potentially failed device before explant

    Exorotated radiographic views have additional diagnostic value in detecting an osseous impediment in patients with posterior ankle impingement

    No full text
    Objectives A standard lateral radiograph is the first step in the diagnostic workup in patients with posterior ankle pain. Because of overprojection by other structures at suboptimal radiographic projection angle, often an os trigonum is not discovered or erroneously be mistaken for a hypertrophic posterior talar process. The aim of this study was to identify the projection angles at which a radiograph is optimal for detecting bony impediments in patients suffering from posterior ankle impingement. Methods Using ankle CT scans of patients with posterior ankle impingement, digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) simulating 13 different radiographic projection angles were generated. The ankle CT scans served as a reference for the detection of an os trigonum and hypertrophic posterior talar process. Members of the Ankleplatform Study Group were invited to assess the DRRs, for presence or absence of an os trigonum or hypertrophic posterior talar process. Diagnostic accuracy and interobserver reliability were estimated for each projection angle. In addition, the diagnostic accuracy of the standard lateral view in combination with the rotated views was calculated. Results High sensitivity for detecting an os trigonum was found for +15° (90.3%), +20° (81.7%) and +25° (89.7%) degrees of exorotation. Specificity in this range of projection angles was between 89.6% and 97.8%. Regarding the presence of a hypertrophic posterior talar process, increased sensitivity was found for +15° (65.7%), +20° (61.0%), +25° (60.7%), +30° (56.3%) and +35° (54.5%). Specificity ranged from 78.0% to 94.7%. The combination of the standard lateral view in combination with exorotated views showed higher sensitivity. For detecting an os trigonum, a negative predictive value of 94.6% (+15°), 94.1% (+20°) and 96.1% (+25°) was found. Conclusion This study underlines the additional diagnostic value of exorotated views instead of, or in addition to the standard lateral view in detecting an osseous impediment. We recommend to use the 25° exorotated view in combination with the routine standard lateral ankle view in the workup of patients with posterior ankle pain. Level of evidence Level III

    BJS commission on surgery and perioperative care post-COVID-19

    No full text
    Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic by the WHO on 11 March 2020 and global surgical practice was compromised. This Commission aimed to document and reflect on the changes seen in the surgical environment during the pandemic, by reviewing colleagues experiences and published evidence. Methods: In late 2020, BJS contacted colleagues across the global surgical community and asked them to describe how severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) had affected their practice. In addition to this, the Commission undertook a literature review on the impact of COVID-19 on surgery and perioperative care. A thematic analysis was performed to identify the issues most frequently encountered by the correspondents, as well as the solutions and ideas suggested to address them. Results: BJS received communications for this Commission from leading clinicians and academics across a variety of surgical specialties in every inhabited continent. The responses from all over the world provided insights into multiple facets of surgical practice from a governmental level to individual clinical practice and training. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic has uncovered a variety of problems in healthcare systems, including negative impacts on surgical practice. Global surgical multidisciplinary teams are working collaboratively to address research questions about the future of surgery in the post-COVID-19 era. The COVID-19 pandemic is severely damaging surgical training. The establishment of a multidisciplinary ethics committee should be encouraged at all surgical oncology centres. Innovative leadership and collaboration is vital in the post-COVID-19 era

    BJS commission on surgery and perioperative care post-COVID-19

    Get PDF
    Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic by the WHO on 11 March 2020 and global surgical practice was compromised. This Commission aimed to document and reflect on the changes seen in the surgical environment during the pandemic, by reviewing colleagues' experiences and published evidence
    corecore