Which patients with renal colic should be referred?

Around 1-2 people per thousand present with an acute episode of pain caused by renal stones each year. Renal colic is classically sudden in onset, unilateral, and radiates from loin to groin. Renal pelvic or upper ureteric stones usually cause more flank pain and tenderness while lower ureteric stones cause pain radiating towards the ipsilateral testicle or labia. Other common symptoms include nausea and vomiting, haematuria and irritative LUTS. A febrile patient with renal colic requires immediate hospital admission. Symptoms suggestive of renal colic along with a positive dipstick for haematuria have a reported sensitivity of 84% and specificity of 99% but it is important to consider other differential diagnoses. An NSAID is preferred over an opiate drug as an initial analgesic choice as the NSAID can help reduce ureteric spasm. Diclofenac has the best evidence base for this class of analgesic. About 90% of stones will pass spontaneously and thus it is often appropriate to manage renal colic at home. Patients with signs of peritonitis, systemic infection, septic shock as well as those whose diagnosis is unclear should be referred urgently to hospital. Patients who are systemically unwell with renal stones are more likely to have an infected and obstructed urinary tract system that needs urgent imaging and possible drainage. All patients who are managed at home should have renal tract imaging within a week by fast track referral to radiology or as an urgent urology outpatient referral as per local guidelines to rule out an obstructed urinary system. Patients with recurrent stones should be advised to maintain a copious fluid intake (>2 L/day) to reduce the concentration of the urine. A reduction in salt intake (ideally

Day case stapled haemorrhoidopexy for prolapsing haemorrhoids

Objective Conventional surgical management of prolapsing haemorrhoids is by excisional haemorrhoidectomy. Postoperative pain has restricted the application of such procedures in the day case setting. These operations remain associated with a period of restricted activity. The use of circular stapling devices as an alternative to the excisional approach in the management of haemorrhoids has been described. This study reports our experience of stapled haemorrhoidopexy as a day case procedure.

Methods Patients with third or fourth degree haemorrhoids were eligible for the procedure. Patients were considered suitable candidates for day case surgery based on conventional parameters. Symptoms were assessed using a previously validated symptom severity rating score. Stapled haemorrhoiclopexy was carried out using a circular stapling device. Pain scores were obtained prior to discharge. Patients were admitted if pain was uncontrolled despite oral analgesia. Symptoms were re-scored at six-week follow-up.

Results Over a 70-month period 168 consecutive stapled haemorrhoidopexies were performed or directly supervised by one consultant colorectal surgeon. One hundred and ten (65%) patients were considered appropriate candidates for day case surgery by conventional criteria. Ninety-six (87.3%) patients successfully underwent stapled haemorrhoidopexyon a day case basis. Fourteen (12.7%) patients required admission on the day of surgery (5 for early Postoperative bleeding, 4 for pain necessitating continuing opiate analgesia, two for urinary retention and three for surgery performed late in the day). Six (5%) patients were re-admitted postoperatively; four for pain relief and two because of urinary retention. Of the day case patients, 91 (82.7%) and 56 (50.9%) had been seen for 6 week and 6 month review, respectively, at the time of analysis. Symptom scores were 6 (pre-operatively) vs 0 (postoperatively) (P <0.01). 76/91 (83.5%) patients reviewed at 6/52 were asymptomatic.

Conclusion Stapled haemorrhoidopexy is a safe and effective procedure that can be carried out on selected patients on a day case basis. Complications are of a similar nature to excisional haemorrhoidectomy.

The difficult-to-treat, therapy-resistant cough: Why are current cough treatments not working and what can we do?

Cough can persist despite exhaustive diagnostic and therapeutic effort and has been termed 'idiopathic' or 'unexplained' but perhaps 'difficult to treat' cough is a more appropriate description. In this article the reasons for poor treatment response are discussed. These include a lack of physician fidelity to management guidelines, patient non-adherence and the lack of effective medicines. A number of randomized controlled trials have been undertaken including low dose opiate therapy, the use of a speech pathology intervention, oral antibiotics and antidepressants. The success or otherwise of such interventions will be discussed. A number of approaches to deal with the problem of 'difficult to treat cough' will be considered.