Rapunzel syndrome presenting as jejuno-jejunal intussusception.

The term Rapunzel syndrome is used to describe a trichobezoar of the stomach with a long tail of hair extending into the duodenum and small intestine. It is a rare clinical entity, and it is even rarer in these cases that jejuno-jejunal intussusception and resulting intestinal obstruction is a presenting feature. We report one such case, a young female who presented in the emergency department with abdominal pain and bilious vomiting of short duration. Contrast-enhanced CT of the abdomen enabled a diagnosis of a trichobezoar in the stomach extending into the small gut, along with jejuno-jejunal intussusception. On exploration, gastrotomy was performed to remove the gastric trichobezoar, and jejuno-jejunal intussusception was found on three segments in the proximal jejunum, which was resolved upon complete removal of the tail of the bezoar. This case report is unusual, since intussusception is a rare occurrence in Rapunzel syndrome, and this is the first time that it has been diagnosed preoperatively.

Comparative evaluation of naftopidil and tamsulosin in the treatment of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms with benign prostatic hyperplasia.

INTRODUCTION: Naftopidil, approved initially in Japan, is an α1d-adrenergic receptor antagonist (α1-blocker) used to treat lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). It is different from tamsulosin hydrochloride and silodosin, in that it has a higher affinity for the α1D-adrenergic receptor subtype than for the α1A subtype and has a superior efficacy to a placebo and comparable efficacy to other α1-blockers such as tamsulosin. The incidences of ejaculatory disorders and intraoperative floppy iris syndrome induced by naftopidil may also be lower than that for tamsulosin and silodosin, which have a high affinity for the α1A-adrenergic receptor subtype. However, it remains unknown if the efficacy and safety of naftopidil in Japanese men is applicable to Indian men having LUTS/BPH. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two groups of 60 patients each, having LUTS due to BPH, were treated with tamsulosin 0.4 mg and Naftopidil 75 mg for three months. Ultrasonography (for prostate size, post-void residual volume), uroflowmetry, and the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and Quality of Life (QOL) score were recorded at the beginning of the study, and then at one and three months. RESULTS: The prostate size, post-void residual volume, all the uroflowmetry variables, and the IPSS QOL scores showed a statistically significant improvement (P < 0.001) in both the groups. The improvement in the average flow rate and the QOL index was better in the naftopidil group on the intergroup comparison and was statistically significant (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Although the QOL life index was significantly better in the naftopidil group, overall both naftopidil and tamsulosin were found to be equally effective in the treatment of LUTS due to BPH.

Is periprostatic nerve block a gold standard in case of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy?

INTRODUCTION: Controversy exists over the pain during prostate biopsy. Periprostatic nerve block (PNB) is a gold standard anesthetic technique during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy. Recent studies showed that PNB alone is insufficient as analgesic. We compared the efficacy of tramadol and intraprostatic nerve block (INB) in addition to PNB. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective double blinded placebo controlled study at our institute in 150 consecutive patients. Patients were randomized into three groups. Group A received PNB with INB with 1% lignocaine. Group B received oral tramadol with PNB. Group C patients were administered PNB only with 1% lignocaine. Patients were asked to grade the pain level using 11 point linear visual analog scale (VAS) at the time of ultrasound probe insertion, at time of anesthesia, during biopsy, and 30 min after biopsy. RESULTS: The study groups were comparable in demographic profile, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, and prostate size. Group A recorded the minimum mean pain score of 2.66 during prostate biopsy which was significantly lower than group 3 (P < 0.001). Group B recorded significantly lower pain score at time of probe insertion and at anesthetic needle insertion than other two groups. CONCLUSIONS: PNB provides better pain control in TRUS-guided prostate biopsy but still there is need of additional analgesic in the form of tramadol or INB. Tramadol has advantage of oral intake and analgesic effect at time of probe insertion and at nerve block. Both tramadol and INB may be used in combination along with PNB.

Comparative Evaluation of Periprostatic Nerve Block with and without Intraprostatic Nerve Block in Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Prostatic Needle Biopsy.

PURPOSE: Controversy exists over the pain during prostate biopsy. Periprostatic nerve block is a commonly used anaesthetic technique during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy. The recent trend toward increasing the number of cores has become popular. This practice further increases the need for a proper anaesthetic application. We compared the efficacy of periprostatic nerve block with or without intraprostatic nerve block. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective double-blinded placebo-controlled study at our institute with 142 consecutive patients. Patients were randomly assigned into 3 groups. Group 1 received periprostatic nerve block with intraprostatic nerve block with 1% lignocaine. Group 2 patients were administered periprostatic nerve block only with 1% lignocaine. Group 3 received no anaesthesia. Patients were asked to grade their level of pain by using an 11-point linear analogue scale at the time of ultrasound probe insertion, at the time of anaesthesia, during biopsy, and 30 minutes after biopsy. RESULTS: The study groups were comparable in demographic profile, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, and prostate size. The mean pain scores at the time of biopsy in groups 1, 2, and 3 were 2.70, 3.39, and 4.16, respectively. Group 1 recorded the minimum mean pain score of 2.70 during prostate biopsy, which was significantly lower than the scores of groups 2 and 3 (p<0.001). There were no significant differences in pain scores among the 3 groups during probe insertion, during anaesthesia, or at 30 minutes after biopsy (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Periprostatic nerve block with intraprostatic nerve block provides better pain control than does periprostatic nerve block alone in TRUS-guided prostate biopsy.

Comparative evaluation of periprostatic nerve block and diclofenac patch in transrectal ultrasound-guided prostatic needle biopsy.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to compare two analgesic techniques for transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsy: diclofenac patch versus periprostatic nerve block with 1% lidocaine. OBJECTIVES: To study the efficacy of and compare diclofenac patch and periprostatic nerve block as analgesia in TRUS-guided prostate needle biopsy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In total, 60 patients were prospectively randomized into three groups: those in whom a diclofenac patch was used (n = 20), those in whom periprostatic nerve block was used (n = 20), and a control group (n = 20). Prostate biopsy was performed after administration of analgesia according to group. RESULTS: The three groups were similar in terms of age, prostate volume, and PSA (prostate-specific antigen) levels. Pain scores were significantly lower in the nerve block group (P = 0.000) at the time of biopsy until 2 h postprocedure, but not at 4 h postprocedure (P = 0.068). No significant difference in pain score was observed in the diclofenac patch group at the time of biopsy (P = 0.106) as compared to the control group, but the diclofenac patch provided adequate pain relief 1 h (P = 0.000), 2 h (0.000), and 4 h (0.002) postprocedure. No significant difference was observed in pain score between the nerve block (P = 0.520) and control groups (0.057) at probe insertion. The pain score at 4 h was significantly lower in the patch group compared to the nerve block and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Periprostatic nerve block provides superior analgesia for TRUS-guided biopsy. Diclofenac patch is useful as an adjunct.

Comparative Evaluation of Periprostatic Nerve Block with and without Intraprostatic Nerve Block in Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Prostatic Needle Biopsy

PURPOSE: Controversy exists over the pain during prostate biopsy. Periprostatic nerve block is a commonly used anaesthetic technique during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy. The recent trend toward increasing the number of cores has become popular. This practice further increases the need for a proper anaesthetic application. We compared the efficacy of periprostatic nerve block with or without intraprostatic nerve block. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective double-blinded placebo-controlled study at our institute with 142 consecutive patients. Patients were randomly assigned into 3 groups. Group 1 received periprostatic nerve block with intraprostatic nerve block with 1% lignocaine. Group 2 patients were administered periprostatic nerve block only with 1% lignocaine. Group 3 received no anaesthesia. Patients were asked to grade their level of pain by using an 11-point linear analogue scale at the time of ultrasound probe insertion, at the time of anaesthesia, during biopsy, and 30 minutes after biopsy. RESULTS: The study groups were comparable in demographic profile, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, and prostate size. The mean pain scores at the time of biopsy in groups 1, 2, and 3 were 2.70, 3.39, and 4.16, respectively. Group 1 recorded the minimum mean pain score of 2.70 during prostate biopsy, which was significantly lower than the scores of groups 2 and 3 (p0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Periprostatic nerve block with intraprostatic nerve block provides better pain control than does periprostatic nerve block alone in TRUS-guided prostate biopsy.

Role of tamsulosin in clearance of upper ureteral calculi after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the role of tamsulosin in stone clearance in patients with upper ureteral stone after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized controlled trial was performed on 117 patients with a single upper ureteral calculus undergoing SWL. The study group received 0.4 mg tamsulosin daily while the control group received hydration and analgesic on demand for a maximum of 3 months. Follow-up visits were performed at 1, 2, and 3 months after SWL. Efficiency of tamsulosin was evaluated in terms of success rate, time for expulsion of fragments, number of SWL sessions, incidence of steinstrasse, and pain intensity. RESULTS: The clearance rate after 1, 2, and 3 months were higher in tamsulosin group than the control group (85%, 89.8%, and 91.5% versus 70.6%, 79.3%, and 86.2%; P = .01, P = .11, and P = .34, respectively). The mean time for expulsion of the fragments was 26.78 ± 11.96 days and 31.28 ± 18.31 days in tamsulosin and control groups, respectively (P = .138). Steinstrasse developed in 8 patients in tamsulosin group and in 13 patients in control group (P = .167). Visual analogue scale pain score was 24.92 ± 7.57 in tamsulosin group and 41.81 ± 17.24 in control group (P = .000). CONCLUSION: Tamsulosin helps in clearance of upper ureteral stones after 1 month of SWL, particularly stones with size of 11 to 15 mm with less requirement of SWL sessions and analgesics.

Immunoreactivity of five antigens of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in patients attending a public health care facility in an area with high endemicity for TB.

The objective of this study was to evaluate people attending a primary health clinic in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil for immunoreactivity to five Mycobacterium tuberculosis antigens, as these antigens are markers of immune response and factors associated with active TB. The serum antibody titers of different categories of patients (defined by microbiological and radiological characteristics and by response to therapy on follow-up) to 38 kDa, 16 kDa, MPT64, ESAT-6 and MT10.3 antigens were determined blind with ELISA. Positive tests to each antigen were defined with ROC analysis. OR were calculated for factors associated with humoral response in patients with active TB. A total of 201 patients underwent serological testing. Patients with confirmed active TB responded more frequently to MPT64 (44%), 16 kDa (37.7%) and 38 kDa (36.1%). ESAT-6 and MT10.3 were also able to distinguish people in TB groups from controls. TB infected subjects responded less frequently to ESAT-6 and MT10.3 (3.7% and 11%, respectively). Sensitivity and specificity to all antigens combined were 58.4% and 60.7%, respectively. Reactivity to 38 kDa and to MPT64 was more likely among alcohol users OR 2.61 (95%CI;1.05-6.94) and OR 3.27 (95%CI;1.33-8.15), respectively. 16 kDa antigen elicited a more protective response among smokers, OR 0.29 (95%CI; 0.10-0.83). It was concluded that reactivity to all antigens tested represented markers of active disease. ESAT-6 and MT10.3 could not be identified as markers of TB infection in this community. Sensitivity was higher to all antigens combined, but at a cost of lower specificity. Interestingly, among factors associated with positive immunoreactivity, alcohol use and smoking seem to polarize the humoral response in different directions. This finding deserves further investigation.