Controversies in the Use of MIGS

Abstract Minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) has fulfilled an unmet need in the management of glaucoma. This chapter highlights some controversial issues regarding the use of MIGS in clinical practice, including (1) whether there is sufficient evidence to advocate combining MIGS with cataract surgery over cataract surgery alone, (2) the merits and drawbacks of different approaches to trabecular bypass and canal-based MIGS procedures, (3) the effect of MIGS on endothelial cell loss, (4) suprachoroidal MIGS devices and whether there is still a role for these procedures, and (5) a comparison between subconjunctival MIGS and trabeculectomy. Several questions are still left unanswered and hopefully, further research and more clinical experience with these new technologies will help improve surgical outcomes for patients

London's Olympic legacy and the Imagine methodology

In 2010 Future of London commissioned academics to work with representatives from the London Boroughs, to consider the legacy of the Olympic Village taking shape in Stratford, in the East End of London. The exercise, in the form of a workshop, was to: review the current context/situation; prioritize issues; envisage future options; explore and develop relevant sustainability indicators; develop a forward plan for community development. This article describes the process adopted in the analysis of the Olympic Village’s transformation from World Media Site to a sustainable part of the Greater London metropolis. The methodology applied, Imagine, is described and some of the key outputs from the analysis and design of legacy process are described. In conclusion the article examines the oeuvre of projects of this kind when set against the challenges of longer term sustainability

Online Crowdfunding for Urologic Cancer Care.

Backgroundwe aimed to characterize the financial needs expressed through online crowdfunding for urologic cancers.Methodsthe data used in this study came from the online crowdfunding platform GoFundMe.com. Using an automated software method, we extracted data for campaigns related to urologic cancers. Subsequently, four independent investigators reviewed all extracted data on prostate, bladder, kidney and testicular cancer. We analyzed campaigns' basic characteristics, goals, fundraising, type of treatment and factors associated with successful campaigns.Resultsin total, we identified 2126 individual campaigns, which were related to direct treatment costs (34%), living expenses (17%) or both (48%). Median fundraising amounts were greatest for testicular cancer. Campaigns for both complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) (median $11,000) or CAM alone (median$8527) achieved higher fundraising totals compared with those for conventional treatments alone (median $5362) (p < 0.01). The number of social media shares was independently associated with campaign success and highest quartile of fundraising.Conclusionsusing an automated web-based approach, we identified and characterized online crowdfunding for urologic cancer care. These findings indicated a diverse range of patient needs related to urologic care and factors related to campaigns' success

Online Crowdfunding for Urologic Cancer Care

Background: we aimed to characterize the financial needs expressed through online crowdfunding for urologic cancers. Methods: the data used in this study came from the online crowdfunding platform GoFundMe.com. Using an automated software method, we extracted data for campaigns related to urologic cancers. Subsequently, four independent investigators reviewed all extracted data on prostate, bladder, kidney and testicular cancer. We analyzed campaigns’ basic characteristics, goals, fundraising, type of treatment and factors associated with successful campaigns. Results: in total, we identified 2126 individual campaigns, which were related to direct treatment costs (34%), living expenses (17%) or both (48%). Median fundraising amounts were greatest for testicular cancer. Campaigns for both complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) (median $11,000) or CAM alone (median$8527) achieved higher fundraising totals compared with those for conventional treatments alone (median $5362) (p < 0.01). The number of social media shares was independently associated with campaign success and highest quartile of fundraising. Conclusions: using an automated web-based approach, we identified and characterized online crowdfunding for urologic cancer care. These findings indicated a diverse range of patient needs related to urologic care and factors related to campaigns’ success