Management of transitional-cell carcinoma of the renal pelvis and ureter.

Transitional-cell carcinoma of the renal pelvis or ureter is a relatively rare disease. Several risk factors are smoking, occupational carcinogens, analgesic abuse or Balkan nephropathy. The grade and stage of the disease have the most significant impact on the outcome. The treatment of renal pelvis and ureter tumours is open or laparoscopic surgery varying from conservative to more extensive surgical procedures, i.e. radical nephroureterectomy including removal of the contents of Gerota's fascia with ipsilateral ureter and a cuff of bladder at its distal extent. Most available data are from retrospective studies and surgery is the mainstay of treatment. Chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy are possible adjuvant or primary treatment for selected patients; however, prospective studies are needed to confirm their use.

Teaching clinical anatomy of the female pelvic floor to undergraduate students: A critical review of nevralgic points

Pelvic floor anatomy is complex and its three-dimensional organization is often difficult to understand for both undergrad- uate and postgraduate students. Here, we focused on several critical points that need to be considered when teaching the perineum. We have to deal with a mixed population of students and with a variety of interest. Yet, a perfect knowledge of the pelvic floor is the basis for any gynecologist and for any surgical intervention. Our objectives are several-fold; i) to estab- lish the objectives and the best way of teaching, ii) to identify and localize areas in the female pelvic floor that are suscepti- ble to generate problems in understanding the three-dimensional organization, iii) to create novel approaches by respecting the anatomical surroundings, and iv) prospectively, to identify elements that may create problems during surgery i.e. to have a closer look at nerve trajectories and on compression sites that may cause neuralgia or postoperative pain. A feedback from students concludes that they have difficulties to assimilate this much information, especially the different imaging tech- niques. Eventually, this will lead to a severe selection of what has to be taught and included in lectures or practicals. Another consequence is that more time to study prosected pelves needs to be given.

Comparison of two osteoporotic fracture management pathways: experience at 1 year

Introduction: Osteoporosis presenting as low-impact fractures to traumatology units is often undiagnosed and under-treated. Results from the Osteocare study in Lausanne (a nurse based intervention, passive pathway) showed that only 19% of patients received management for osteoporosis, and in the literature [1], the rate is between 10-25%. We have evaluated a different management concept, based on the systematic assessment of patients with osteoporotic fractures during and after hospitalization (active pathway). Methods: Inpatients admitted to the Department of Musculoskeletal Medicine for a fragility fracture were identified by a nurse according to a predefined questionnaire and were then clinically evaluated by a doctor. Based on the results, a management plan was proposed to the patients. Patients could choose between follow up either by their GP or by the Centre of Bone Disease of the CHUV. For patients who chose follow-up in our Centre, we assessed their adherence to medical follow-up 1 year inclusion. The results of patients who had been evaluated in our cohort between the 1 November 2008 and the 1 December 2009 were analysed. Results: 573 inpatients received specific management of their osteoporotic fracture over 18 months. The mean age was 77 y (31-99), 81% were women (203 hip fractures, 40 pelvis fractures, 101 arm fractures, 57 vertebral fractures, 63 ankle fractures, and 25 others sites). During the study period, 303 patients received a proposition of a specific treatment. 39 (13%) chose a follow up with the GP, 19 (6%) dead and 245 (81%) preferred a follow up in our Centre. After 1 year, 166 (67%) patients are under follow up in our outpatient clinic. Conclusion: With an active clinical pathway that starts during the hospitalization, consisting on a nursing evaluation followed by a medical consultation by an expert in osteoporosis, the adherence increased from 19% to 67% in terms of follow up. These results lead us to propose a consultation with a doctor experienced in osteoporosis after all osteoporotic fractures.

Evaluation of organ-specific peripheral doses after 2-dimensional, 3-dimensional and hybrid intensity modulated radiation therapy for breast cancer based on Monte Carlo and convolution/superposition algorithms: implications for secondary cancer risk assessment.

To make a comprehensive evaluation of organ-specific out-of-field doses using Monte Carlo (MC) simulations for different breast cancer irradiation techniques and to compare results with a commercial treatment planning system (TPS). Three breast radiotherapy techniques using 6MV tangential photon beams were compared: (a) 2DRT (open rectangular fields), (b) 3DCRT (conformal wedged fields), and (c) hybrid IMRT (open conformal+modulated fields). Over 35 organs were contoured in a whole-body CT scan and organ-specific dose distributions were determined with MC and the TPS. Large differences in out-of-field doses were observed between MC and TPS calculations, even for organs close to the target volume such as the heart, the lungs and the contralateral breast (up to 70% difference). MC simulations showed that a large fraction of the out-of-field dose comes from the out-of-field head scatter fluence (>40%) which is not adequately modeled by the TPS. Based on MC simulations, the 3DCRT technique using external wedges yielded significantly higher doses (up to a factor 4-5 in the pelvis) than the 2DRT and the hybrid IMRT techniques which yielded similar out-of-field doses. In sharp contrast to popular belief, the IMRT technique investigated here does not increase the out-of-field dose compared to conventional techniques and may offer the most optimal plan. The 3DCRT technique with external wedges yields the largest out-of-field doses. For accurate out-of-field dose assessment, a commercial TPS should not be used, even for organs near the target volume (contralateral breast, lungs, heart).