Risk of chronic kidney disease after cancer nephrectomy.

The incidence of early stage renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is increasing and observational studies have shown equivalent oncological outcomes of partial versus radical nephrectomy for stage I tumours. Population studies suggest that compared with radical nephrectomy, partial nephrectomy is associated with decreased mortality and a lower rate of postoperative decline in kidney function. However, rates of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in patients who have undergone nephrectomy might be higher than in the general population. The risks of new-onset or accelerated CKD and worsened survival after nephrectomy might be linked, as kidney insufficiency is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease and mortality. Nephron-sparing approaches have, therefore, been proposed as the standard of care for patients with type 1a tumours and as a viable option for those with type 1b tumours. However, prospective data on the incidence of de novo and accelerated CKD after cancer nephrectomy is lacking, and the only randomized trial to date was closed prematurely. Intrinsic abnormalities in non-neoplastic kidney parenchyma and comorbid conditions (including diabetes mellitus and hypertension) might increase the risks of CKD and RCC. More research is needed to better understand the risk of CKD post-nephrectomy, to develop and validate predictive scores for risk-stratification, and to optimize patient management

Dracunculiasis: Two cases with rare presentations

Dracunculiasis (Guinea worm Disease) is a debilitating disease caused by parasite Dracunculus medinensis. The condition is not life threatening, but causes significant morbidity. Patients may be sick for several months. Dracunculiasis has been claimed to be eradicated in India since 1999. We report two patients with calcified guinea worm. Both patient required surgical removal of calcified worm. The cases document that the parasite can cause chronic recurrent nodules and ulcers

Students’ response to implementation of ‘OSPE’ as a tool for assessment of practical skills of undergraduates in the subject of anatomy

Introduction: For evaluating the practical knowledge of the students, objective structured practical examination (OSPE) has been used as a tool several times. The assessment of the student’s potential in different ways is a part of medical education. The practical examination is a typical method of assessment of practical and clinical skills but it lacks an assessment of the psychomotor and communication skills of the student. OSPE formats address these lacunae of the current system. However, it is necessary to assess the OSPE from a student’s perspective. The current study is designed to obtain the student’s opinion regarding OSPE as a tool of assessment in practical examinations. Aims and Objectives: To determine the opinion of students about OSPE as a tool among1st-year medical undergraduates to assess the teaching-learning process in anatomy. Materials and Methods: 150 first-year undergraduates of competency-based medical education (CBME) batch of 2019–20 from the Department of Anatomy of MGM Medical College, Aurangabad, India were chosen for assessing practical skills. A structured questionnaire was designed and distributed among them to collect the required data to assess students’ evaluation of the OSPE. Results and Observations: A total of 150 questionnaires were filled by students with a 90% response rate. The majority of the students favored the inclusion of OSPEas as an assessment tool in the final examinations. Conclusion: The study reveals that the majority of the students (68%) have found OSPE as an acceptable tool. The OSPE is reliable for formative as well as a summative assessment for undergraduate medical students