Role of serum cathelicidin in diagnosis of patient with prostatitis and prostate carcinoma

Background: This study investigated the diagnostic role of 75 levels measured in serum prostatitis and prostate carcinoma and in the differentiation of these two conditions. Methods: The study was conducted with 75 patients histopathologically diagnosed with prostate carcinoma or prostatitis and followed up at the Departments of Urology and Medical Oncology and 21 healthy male subjects. Serum cathelicidin levels were investigated using the ELISA method. Statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS for Windows 22.0 package software. Compliance of the variables to normal distribution was examined using visual and analytic methods. In the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, cases with a p value of greater than 0.05 were accepted as normal distribution. Results: A total of 75 patients including 45 diagnosed with prostate carcinoma and 30 diagnosed with prostatitis, as well as 21 healthy control subjects were included in the study. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was detected as 23 (4–1200) ng/mL in the patients with prostate carcinoma and as 9.85 (3.9–405 ng/mL) in the patients with prostatitis. The cathelicidin levels were diagnostically significant when assessed by ROC analysis in the prostate cancer, prostatitis and control groups (p = 0.005). The cutoff values derived from the ROC curve analysis were 3.5151 ng/mL for distinguishing prostate cancer from prostatitis, 2.2620 ng/mL for prostate cancer versus control group and 1.2340 ng/mL for prostatitis versus control group. Conclusions: In this study we showed that the serum cathelicidin levels were significantly higher in the patients diagnosed with prostate carcinoma. Measurement of serum cathelicidin levels could be used as a diagnostic marker in prostate carcinoma as well as facilitating differential diagnosis to strengthen the diagnostic suspicion before prostate biopsy and distinguish the diagnosis from prostatitis cases. © 2022, The Author(s)

Efficacy of mirabegron in medical expulsive therapy

To show the efficacy of mirabegron for medical expulsive treatment, in patients had intramural located distal ureteral stone. A 80 patients had intramural ureteral stone were assessed retrospectively between April 2017 and January 2018. Mirabegron 50 mg/day + diclofenac 100 mg/day (group 1, n = 40), and only diclofenac 100 mg/day (group 2, n = 40) were administered to patients, consecutively. Age, gender, stone size, laterality, and severity of hydronephrosis were recorded. Spontaneous stone expulsion rates (SER), stone expulsion time, and the number of daily colic episodes were evaluated. In the group 1, one (2.5%) patient was excluded due to nasopharyngitis, and one (2.5%) patient was excluded due to 5 mmHg systolic blood pressure increase. In addition, four (10%) patients in group 1, and six (15%) patients in group 2, who did not attend follow-up examinations, were excluded from the study. There was not any statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of age, gender, stone location, severity of hydronephrosis, stone size (p = 0.736, p = 0.310, p = 0.467, p = 0.801, p = 0.761, consecutively). Spontaneous expulsion ratios were calculated as 73.52% in group 1, and 47.05% in group 2 (p = 0.026). However, there was not any statistically significant difference in terms of stone expulsion time (p = 0.979). SER for patients had ? 6 mm stones was higher in group 1 (87.5 vs 52.49%, p = 0.031). In addition, group 2 patients had more pain episodes (1.02 ± 0.52 vs. 1.29 ± 0.57, p = 0.049). In the current study, mirabegron has been shown to be an efficient, safe and a new treatment modality, with lower side effect profile for the intramural located distal ureteral stones. © 2018, Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature

Comparison of two different anesthesia methods in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Purpose: The study aims to compare the effectiveness, safety and costs of two different anesthesia methods in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) operations. Material and Method: In our study, data was retrospectively examined of 1657 patients who underwent PCNL due to renal calculi between 2009 and 2017. Patients were separated into two groups according to the type of anesthesia; as those who underwent PCNL by general anesthesia (GA) (n = 572) and those under spinal anesthesia( SA) (n = 1085). Standard PCNL technique was used in both groups. Gender, age, operation duration, period of hospitalization, stone-free ratio, post-operative narcotic analgesic need and complications were compared between these two groups. Results: A total of 1657 patients consisting of 1064 (64.2%) male patients and 593 (35.8%) female patients were included in the study. The average age of the all patients was 33.2 ± 12.4 (range 16-74) years. The two groups were similar in terms of mean age, gender, stone size, stone location and body mass index. Mean operation time was significantly shorter in the SA group than in the GA group (81.8 ± 33.9 minute vs. 118.2 ± -42.9 minute respectively, P < .001). Mean period of hospitalization was remarkable shorter in the SA group than in the GA group (30.0 ± 9.9 hours vs. 38.4 ± 11.2 hours respectively, P < .001). Post-operative narcotic analgesic need rate was significantly higher in the GA group than in the SA group (33.4% vs. 10.9%, respectively, P < .001). Anesthesia cost was found significantly lower in the SA group than in the GA group (USD 21.3±2.8 vs. USD 83.6 ± 9.5, respectively, P < .001). Significant difference was not observed between both groups in terms of stone-free ratio, amount of bleeding, fluoroscopy time, pre-operative and post-operative complications. Conclusion: Compared to those performed with GA, PCNL performed with SA is a safe, effective and low-cost method. © 2018 Urology and Nephrology Research Centre

Comparison of dorsal intercostal perforator artery flap and primary closure in myelomeningocele repair

Purpose Of the many suggested techniques, we used dorsal intercostal perforator artery flap (DIPAF) for the closure of myelomeningocele defects. This study compared the outcomes of primary closure and DIPAF in the closure of myelomeningoceles. Methods Data of 24 patients that underwent myelomeningocele surgery at a single institution between November 2015 and September 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Results The primary closure group had 13 patients (54.17%) and the DIPAF group had 11 (45.83%). The mean age was 7.91 +/- 13.27 days (1-60 days). Twelve patients were female and 12 were male. In 22 patients, the myelomeningocele sacs were in the lumbosacral region, while in 2, they were in the thoracolumbar region. The mean defect sizes were 14.20 +/- 4.62 cm(2)and 18.44 +/- 3.49 cm(2)in the primary closure and DIPAF groups, respectively. In each group, four patients had a kyphotic deformity. In the primary closure group, three patients had wound necrosis, two had wound dehiscence, and four had cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage. In the DIPAF group, one patient had wound necrosis and one had CSF leakage. Significantly fewer complications related to the operation area were observed in the DIPAF group (p < 0.05). Increased defect size, kyphotic deformity, and presence of hydrocephalus were found to be risk factors for complications related to the operation area. Conclusion This surgical treatment protects neural tissue, prevent CSF leakage, and reduce central nervous system infection rates in myelomeningocele patients. Closure technique with the fasciocutaneous skin flap has more satisfying results than primary closure