Cord blood transplantation has been used extensively in the allogeneic setting for acquired and genetic disorders of hematopoiesis. There is less experience in the utility of autologous cord blood transplantation, and there is great controversy about the role of autologous cord blood collection and storage. We report on the successful use of autologous cord blood transplantation for the treatment of severe aplastic anemia following fulminant hepatic failure and living related liver transplantation.
Objective: To identify factors related to the conversion of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) to robot-assisted radical nephrectomy (RRN) based on data collected by a statewide database in Michigan.
Methods: Using the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative-Kidney mass: Identifying and Defining Necessary Evaluation and therapY (MUSIC-KIDNEY) database we identified 574 patients for whom RPN was planned. Patient and tumor characteristics were obtained including body mass index (BMI), Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), RENAL nephrometry score, tumor size, and pathologic staging. Treating centers were subdivided by annualized case volume and academic status. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess the impact of these factors on the risk of conversion to RRN from RPN.
Results: The conversion rate of RPN to RN was 5.75% (33/574). The difference in RENAL nephrometry score, tumor stage, and size reached statistical significance on bivariate analysis (p<0.001). The tumor stage also reached statistical significance on multivariate analysis [odds ratio (OR); 95%CI (8.97; 3.93-20.48) p<0.001]. The conversion rate was lower among high-volume versus low-volume practices; however, statistical significance was not reached [5.2% (27/520) vs.11% (6/54); p=0.11].
Conclusions: Patient factors such as tumor size and renal nephrometry score are likely related to the conversion of RPN to RRN decisions. The data shows that Michigan urologists appear to appropriately assess intra-operative findings and convert to RRN in cases of more advanced kidney tumors. Lower volume centers appear to trend towards a higher conversion rate. Continued quality improvement tracking analysis may further clarify this relationship.
To survey Urologists and Radiation Oncologists in Metropolitan Detroit regarding practice patterns in managing non-metastatic prostate cancer during the pandemic. Methods An online survey was created to capture the perspective of the impact the COVID-19 restrictions have on the management of prostate cancer by Urologists and Radiation Oncologists in the Detroit Metropolitan area. Results While most physicians felt that their facilities had adequate quantities of personal protective equipment (PPE), one in four offices reported that they did not have sufficient access to PPE. Urologists surveyed indicated that most of the low risk prostate cancer surgeries were cancelled and 56.2% had half or more of intermediate and high risk disease prostatectomies cancelled as well. Treatment options were then shifted towards either temporary surveillance or hormone therapy. Radiation Oncologists indicated that prostate cancer patients ready to start treatment were mostly delayed with temporary surveillance or hormone therapy depending on risk category (60% indicated they delayed low risk and favorable intermediate risk cases, 56% unfavorable intermediate risk cases, and 44% high risk cases). More than 80% of patients already undergoing treatment continued radiation. Conclusion In the setting of this pandemic, the management of prostate cancer has shifted to a much more conservative approach. While the response to the crisis has not been uniform, the majority of the practitioners followed newly established guidelines. The long-term outcomes of delays and deviations from standard treatment approaches will remain to be seen
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.