Median Duration of Hospital Stay after Early Removal of Foley's Catheter among Patients Undergoing Transurethral Resection of Prostate: A Descriptive Cross-sectional Study.

INTRODUCTION: Transurethral resection of the prostate requires a catheter in situ post-surgery. Early removal of catheter can reduce the length of hospital stay reducing the healthcare cost. It can also reduce the risk of infection due to prolonged catheterization. Our aim was to determine the median duration of hospital stay after early foley's removal after transurethral resection of prostate among patients in a tertiary care hospital. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional study was done in a tertiary care hospital from July 2019 to December 2020 and ethical clearance was obtained from the institutional review committee. Foley's catheter were removed on the first post-operative day, who met the criteria of catheter removal. Convenience sampling was done. After foley's removal patients were observed for spontaneous voiding. Patients with complications like hematuria, clot retention, urinary retention were recatherized. The data were expressed in mean with standard deviation, median with interquartile range and frequency and percentage as applicable using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 16. RESULTS: Out of the 150 participants included in the study, the median duration of hospital stay after the early removal of foley's catheter was 3 days (interquartile range 2-4 days). A total of 20 (13.3%) patients underwent recatherization. Nine (6%) patients had to be recatheterized due to clot retention, and 11 (7.3%) were due to urinary retention. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the median duration of hospital stay after early removal of foley's catheter among patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate was similar to studies done in national/international settings.

Efficacy and safety of intensity-modulated radiotherapy alone versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy plus chemotherapy for treatment of intermediate-risk nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: This study directs to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) alone versus IMRT plus chemotherapy in intermediate-risk NPC (stage II and T3N0M0). METHODS: A total of 124 patients with stage II and T3N0M0 NPC were pair-matched (1:1 ratio) to form two groups: an IMRT-alone group and an IMRT/chemotherapy group. Survival outcomes (overall survival [OS], disease-free survival [DFS], locoregional relapse-free survival [LRRFS], distant metastasis-free survival [DMFS]) and treatment-related grade 3-4 acute toxicity events were compared between the groups. RESULTS: Survival outcomes for patients with stage II and T3N0M0 NPC were quiet comparable between patients treated with IMRT alone versus patients treated with IMRT/chemotherapy: 5-year OS was 91.9% vs. 90.3%, respectively (P = 0.727); DFS was 87.1% vs. 88.7%, respectively (P = 0.821); LRFFS was 96.8% vs. 95.2%, respectively (P = 0.646), and DMFS was 91.9% vs. 91.5%, respectively (P = 0.955). Grade 3 acute toxicities were significantly higher with IMRT/chemotherapy than with IMRT alone: mucositis, 15% vs. 5% (P = 0.004); leukopenia/neutropenia, 8% vs. 1% (P <  0.015); and nausea/vomiting, 22% vs. 3% (P <  0.001). CONCLUSION: For intermediate-risk (stage II and T3N0M0) NPC patients, the addition of chemotherapy to IMRT does not appear to provide any survival benefit. Moreover, grade 3 acute toxicities are also more common in patients receiving IMRT plus chemotherapy.