Can urethrolysis resolve outlet obstruction related symptoms after Burch colposuspension for stress urinary incontinence?

OBJECTIVE Bladder outlet obstruction may occur after any incontinence surgery and may present as OAB, hesitancy and or the feeling of incomplete emptying. Aim of this study was to analyze the clinical and urodynamical outcome after urethrolysis in patients presenting with various clinical symptoms after Burch colposuspension for stress urinary incontinence. STUDY DESIGN Between January 2005 and December 2014, all patients who presented with symptoms and with bladder outlet obstruction were included. All patients had undergone Burch or Cowan colposuspension for stress urinary incontinence previously. Primary endpoint was the visual analogue scale (VAS) as measurement of patient perceived disease impact. Secondary endpoints were the various domains of the King's Health Questionnaire, urodynamic parameters as detrusor pressure at maximum flow, residual urine and sonographic bladder wall thickness before and six months after intervention. RESULTS Seventy-two female patients were included in this study whereof 42 suffered from urgency and urge incontinence, 20 from hesitancy and/or slow stream, seven from residual urine of more than 100ml and three from a combination of urgency and residual urine. VAS improved significantly (p<0.0001). Quality of life as determined by the King's Health Questionnaire improved for the domains general health, role limitations, emotions, physical limitations, personal limitations and incontinence impact significantly. Micturition pressure dropped significantly from 43cmH2O (95% CI 19-59cmH2O) to 18cmH2O (95% CI 16-23.5 H2O). Residual urine changed from 110ml (range 20-380ml) to 32ml (20-115ml). Bladder wall thickness decreased from 7mm (95% CI 6.235-7.152) to 5mm (95% CI 5.037-5.607; p<0.01). CONCLUSION Urethrolysis may resolve patients' symptoms and lower micturition pressure but irritative symptoms may persist.

Similar outcome of upfront-unrelated and matched sibling stem cell transplantation in idiopathic paediatric aplastic anaemia. A study on behalf of the UK Paediatric BMT Working Party, Paediatric Diseases Working Party and Severe Aplastic Anaemia Working Party of EBMT

Abstract We explored the feasibility of unrelated donor haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) upfront without prior immunosuppressive therapy (IST) in paediatric idiopathic severe aplastic anaemia (SAA). This cohort was then compared to matched historical controls who had undergone first-line therapy with a matched sibling/family donor (MSD) HSCT (n = 87) or IST with horse antithymocyte globulin and ciclosporin (n = 58) or second-line therapy with unrelated donor HSCT post-failed IST (n = 24). The 2-year overall survival in the upfront cohort was 96 ± 4% compared to 91 ± 3% in the MSD controls (P = 0·30) and 94 ± 3% in the IST controls (P = 0·68) and 74 ± 9% in the unrelated donor HSCT post-IST failure controls (P = 0·02).The 2-year event-free survival in the upfront cohort was 92 ± 5% compared to 87 ± 4% in MSD controls (P = 0·37), 40 ± 7% in IST controls (P = 0·0001) and 74 ± 9% in the unrelated donor HSCT post-IST failure controls (n = 24) (P = 0·02). Outcomes for upfront-unrelated donor HSCT in paediatric idiopathic SAA were similar to MSD HSCT and superior to IST and unrelated donor HSCT post-IST failure. Front-line therapy with matched unrelated donor HSCT is a novel treatment approach and could be considered as first-line therapy in selected paediatric patients who lack a MSD. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Effectiveness of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for the treatment of pain in knee and hip osteoarthritis: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the backbone of osteoarthritis pain management. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of different preparations and doses of NSAIDs on osteoarthritis pain in a network meta-analysis. METHODS For this network meta-analysis, we considered randomised trials comparing any of the following interventions: NSAIDs, paracetamol, or placebo, for the treatment of osteoarthritis pain. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the reference lists of relevant articles for trials published between Jan 1, 1980, and Feb 24, 2015, with at least 100 patients per group. The prespecified primary and secondary outcomes were pain and physical function, and were extracted in duplicate for up to seven timepoints after the start of treatment. We used an extension of multivariable Bayesian random effects models for mixed multiple treatment comparisons with a random effect at the level of trials. For the primary analysis, a random walk of first order was used to account for multiple follow-up outcome data within a trial. Preparations that used different total daily dose were considered separately in the analysis. To assess a potential dose-response relation, we used preparation-specific covariates assuming linearity on log relative dose. FINDINGS We identified 8973 manuscripts from our search, of which 74 randomised trials with a total of 58 556 patients were included in this analysis. 23 nodes concerning seven different NSAIDs or paracetamol with specific daily dose of administration or placebo were considered. All preparations, irrespective of dose, improved point estimates of pain symptoms when compared with placebo. For six interventions (diclofenac 150 mg/day, etoricoxib 30 mg/day, 60 mg/day, and 90 mg/day, and rofecoxib 25 mg/day and 50 mg/day), the probability that the difference to placebo is at or below a prespecified minimum clinically important effect for pain reduction (effect size [ES] -0·37) was at least 95%. Among maximally approved daily doses, diclofenac 150 mg/day (ES -0·57, 95% credibility interval [CrI] -0·69 to -0·46) and etoricoxib 60 mg/day (ES -0·58, -0·73 to -0·43) had the highest probability to be the best intervention, both with 100% probability to reach the minimum clinically important difference. Treatment effects increased as drug dose increased, but corresponding tests for a linear dose effect were significant only for celecoxib (p=0·030), diclofenac (p=0·031), and naproxen (p=0·026). We found no evidence that treatment effects varied over the duration of treatment. Model fit was good, and between-trial heterogeneity and inconsistency were low in all analyses. All trials were deemed to have a low risk of bias for blinding of patients. Effect estimates did not change in sensitivity analyses with two additional statistical models and accounting for methodological quality criteria in meta-regression analysis. INTERPRETATION On the basis of the available data, we see no role for single-agent paracetamol for the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis irrespective of dose. We provide sound evidence that diclofenac 150 mg/day is the most effective NSAID available at present, in terms of improving both pain and function. Nevertheless, in view of the safety profile of these drugs, physicians need to consider our results together with all known safety information when selecting the preparation and dose for individual patients. FUNDING Swiss National Science Foundation (grant number 405340-104762) and Arco Foundation, Switzerland.