Percutaneous nephrostomy in obstructing pelvic malignancy does not facilitate further oncological treatment.

OBJECTIVE: The optimal management of patients with ureteric obstruction in advanced malignancy is unclear. How quality of life is affected by a nephrostomy and how many of these patients undergo further oncological treatment remains uncertain. The objective of this retrospective multicentre study was to look at the outcomes of patients who had percutaneous nephrostomy insertion for malignancy. METHODS: We identified patients who had a nephrostomy inserted for ureteric obstruction due to malignancy at our institution from January 2015 to December 2018. We obtained data retrospectively from our electronic patient record system. Patients who had nephrostomy insertion for other causes such as ureteric calculi or injury were excluded from the study. RESULTS: 105 patients underwent nephrostomy insertion during this time interval. 51.42% patients (n = 54) had urological malignancies (bladder and/or prostate cancer). The median LOS was 14 days (range 1-104 days) post-procedure and 39.04% (n = 41) had at least one 30-day readmission to hospital. The average starting creatinine level was 348 mmol/L (range 49-1133) and the average creatinine at discharge was 170 mmol/L (range 44-651). Although the average change in the creatinine (190 mmol/L) is statistically significant (p < 0.001), it did not seem to prolong life of the patients. Only 26 (24.76%) patients were alive (all-cause mortality) at the end of the 4-year period with an average life expectancy of 139 days following nephrostomy. Only 30.47% (n = 32) patients underwent further oncological treatment. CONCLUSION: In our series, most patients who had nephrostomy insertion for ureteric obstruction due to malignancy had no further oncological treatment following insertion. Percutaneous nephrostomy is a procedure not without associated morbidity and does not always prolong survival. Due to the poor prognosis in cases of advanced malignancy, we advocate multi-disciplinary decision-making prior to nephrostomy insertion.

Improving out-of-hours surgical patient care.

PURPOSE: The Royal College of Surgeons recognises patient handover as the point at which patients are collectively at their most vulnerable. Concerns were raised in a London teaching hospital surgical department regarding an unstructured handover system, poor access to relevant clinical information, and inadequate weekend staffing. A quality improvement programme was designed and implemented to respond to these concerns and improve patient safety. The paper aims to discuss these issues. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: A structured questionnaire was distributed to staff and results used to construct a diagram outlining the main factors influencing weekend patient safety. This framework was used to design changes, including a new electronic handover tool, regular handover meetings and additional weekend staff. Regular staff training was provided, and success was assessed in a continuous audit cycle with the results fed back to team leaders. FINDINGS: Over a three-month period, the handover meeting recorded an attendance rate consistently above 80 per cent. The electronic handover entries were scored according to seven criteria (correct layout; key information, i.e.: patient location, clinical priority, active issues, resuscitation status, test results and weekend plan), averaging between 42.2 and 92.9 per cent, with progressive improvement seen over the assessment period. Weekend staffing was increased by 50 per cent, allowing a dedicated team to care for stable inpatients and to oversee discharges. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This improvement programme delivered lasting and significant change in response to staff concerns. It resulted in a more structured and reliable weekend system and established key mechanisms for dynamic performance feedback.

Peritoneal dialysis in patients with failed kidney transplant: Single centre experience.

AIM: To determine if patients with failing kidney transplants who opt to have peritoneal dialysis (PD) have poor short-term PD technique survival and increased rates of peritonitis. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis comparing 50 consecutive patients starting PD after a failed kidney transplant to 93 incident patients starting PD (matching for age, gender, diabetes causing renal failure, ethnicity and year of starting PD). RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was 26 months. PD technique survival was lower for the post-transplant cohort. However, this did not appear to be related to PD peritonitis risk; infection rate was lower in the post-transplant group albeit not statistically significant (1 in 23.6 patient months vs 1 in 22.5 patient months). There were no differences in the proportion of Gram positive: Gran negative: Culture Negative infections. The only fungal peritonitis occurred in a Control patient. Results of baseline Peritoneal Equilibration Tests were not different; D/Pcr was 0.69 for post-TP versus 0.64 for Control (P = ns), and net UF was 250 mL for post-TP versus 310 mL for Control (P = ns). PET results after 12 months were also similar. CONCLUSION: Our study found a small but significantly higher rate of PD technique failure in the post-transplant cohort, but this did not appear to be related to peritonitis rates or peritoneal membrane function. Further studies are required to explore reasons for PD technique failure in patients who have had kidney transplant, but our study supports the use of PD in selected patient from this cohort.

Pitfalls in the measurement of skin autofluorescence to determine tissue advanced glycosylation content in haemodialysis patients.

AIM: Skin autofluoresence has been advocated as a quick non-invasive method of measuring tissue advanced glycosylation end products (AGE), which have been reported to correlate with cardiovascular risk in the dialysis patient. Most studies have been performed in patients from a single racial group, and we wanted to look at the reliability of skin autofluoresence measurements in a multiracial dialysis population and whether results were affected by haemodialysis. METHODS: We measured skin autofluoresence three times in both forearms of 139 haemodialysis patients pre-dialysis and 36 post-dialysis. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-nine patients, 62.2% male, 35.3% diabetic, 59% Caucasoid, mean age 65.5 ± 15.2 years were studied. Reproducibility of measurements between the 1st and 2nd measurements was very good (r(2 ) = 0.94, P < 0.001, Bland Altman bias 0.05, confidence limits -0.02 to 0.04). However, skin autoflourescence measurements were not possible in one forearm in 8.5% Caucasoids, 25% Far Asian, 28% South Asians and 75% African or Afro Caribbean (P < 0.001). Mean skin autofluorescence in the right forearm was 3.3 ± 0.74 arbitrary units (AU) and left forearm 3.18 ± 0.82 AU pre-dialysis, and post-dialysis there was a fall in those patients dialysing with a left sided arteriovenous fistula (left forearm pre 3.85 ± 0.72 vs post 3.36 ± 0.55 AU, P = 0.012). CONCLUSION: Although skin autofluorescence is a relatively quick non-invasive method of measuring tissue AGE and measurements were reproducible, it was often not possible to obtain measurements in patients with highly pigmented skin. To exclude potential effects of arteriovenous fistulae we would suggest that measurements are made in the non-fistula forearm pre-dialysis.