RESUMO
Background: A number of occupations and professions may be associated with unique hazards relevant to urologic care. Case Presentation: We relate the presentation, care, and the occupational hazard of urinary tract infection (UTI), presenting as cystitis and pyelonephritis, with stone formation in a scuba diver. The patient voiced concern that his diving suit malfunction was related to his UTI and stone disease. We review the risk of UTI in the diving environment. We also report the development of infection-related stone in this case. Our evaluation included consultation with an expert in diving and associated equipment. Conclusion: Careful installation of P-valves in dry suits, proper maintenance, and monitoring for leakage improved post-dive hygiene, and proper maintenance of P-valve tubing and diving equipment may decrease the incidence of these complications described. Urologists treating UTI and stone disease should be aware of this occupation-related hazard.
RESUMO
Current treatment of metastatic bone prostate cancer with Docetaxel chemotherapy per CHAARTED trial is standard of care. Timing of CT and bone scintigraphy for evaluation of successful treatment of lytic lesions is not available in the literature. We present a case of a 70 year old male with PSA of 586 and wide spread metastatic bone lytic lesions, who underwent androgen deprivation therapy and six cycles of Docetaxel chemotherapy. The patient had clinically successful treatment. Contrast enhanced CT scan demonstrated sclerotic bone lesions with PSA 2.5 at this point in treatment; however, 99mTc-MDP bone scintigraphy remained positive for metastatic lesions.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Totally implantable venous access systems (ports) are commonly placed and have a low complication rate. The most common complication is infection, which can have very negative effects on patients resulting in hospitalization and/or treatment delay in the setting of neoplasm. While a number of variables have been studied in relation to diminishing infectious rates, one remaining question is the effect of accessing the port on day of placement, which is the aim of this retrospective study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After internal review board approval the electronic medical records of 2,006 patients who underwent port placement between 10/1/2008 and 9/30/2013 were reviewed. Of these patients 628 were excluded as they did not have complete placement and removal data available, leaving 1378 patients in our cohort. RESULTS: There was a significantly longer number of infection-free catheter days in the out-patient cohort as compared to the in-patient cohort (p = 0.027). In-patients mean day after placement when the port was first accessed (DAP) (0.5) was statistically earlier (closer to placement) than the out-patients DAP (7.2) (p<0.0001). However, the increased likelihood of infection could not be explained by DAP (p = 0.2029) even when controlling for in-patient and out-patient status (p = 0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Accessing the port on the day of placement does not significantly contribute to an increased likelihood of infection. This study seems to indicate that placing a port on the first day of outpatient therapy likely optimally balances respect for patient time with infection control.
