IntroductionNon-contrast computed tomography (CT) is widely regarded as the gold standard for diagnosis of urolithiasis in emergency department (ED) patients. However, it is costly, time-consuming and exposes patients to significant doses of ionizing radiation. Hydronephrosis on bedside ultrasound is a sign of a ureteral stone, and has a reported sensitivity of 72–83% for identification of unilateral hydronephrosis when compared to CT. The purpose of this study was to evaluate trends in sensitivity related to stone size and number.MethodsThis was a structured, explicit, retrospective chart review. Two blinded investigators used reviewed charts of all adult patients over a 6-month period with a final diagnosis of renal colic. Of these charts, those with CT evidence of renal calculus by attending radiologist read were examined for results of bedside ultrasound performed by an emergency physician. We included only those patient encounters with both CT-proven renal calculi and documented bedside ultrasound results.Results125 patients met inclusion criteria. The overall sensitivity of ultrasound for detection of hydronephrosis was 78.4% [95% confidence interval (CI)=70.2–85.3%]. The overall sensitivity of a positive ultrasound finding of either hydronephrosis or visualized stones was 82.4% [95%CI: 75.6%, 89.2%]. Based on a prior assumption that ultrasound would detect hydronephrosis more often in patients with larger stones, we found a statistically significant (p=0.016) difference in detecting hydronephrosis in patients with a stone ≥6 mm (sensitivity=90% [95% CI=82–98%]) compared to a stone <6 mm (sensitivity=75% [95% CI=65–86%]). For those with 3 or more stones, sensitivity was 100% [95% CI=63–100%]. There were no patients with stones ≥6 mm that had both a negative ultrasound and lack of hematuria.ConclusionIn a population with CT-proven urolithiasis, ED bedside ultrasonography had similar overall sensitivity to previous reports but showed better sensitivity with increasing stone size and number. We identified 100% of patients with stones ≥6 mm that would benefit from medical expulsive therapy by either the presence of hematuria or abnormal ultrasound findings.

Study Type – Therapy (outcomes) Level of Evidence 2b What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Data on the oncological outcomes in patients undergoing salvage cystectomy for recurrent disease following bladder‐sparing treatment is limited and mostly based on case reports. We present the clinical outcomes and prognostic factors in patients undergoing radical cystectomy for recurrent disease following partial cystectomy with long‐term follow‐up. OBJECTIVE To report the clinical outcomes and prognostic factors in patients undergoing salvage radical cystectomy (sRC) for recurrent urothelial carcinoma (UC) of the bladder following partial cystectomy (PC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Between 1971 and 2011, a total of 2290 patients underwent radical cystectomy for UC of the bladder, including 72 patients (3.1%) who underwent sRC following PC. Clinical and pathological data at the time of both PC and sRC were collected. Median follow‐up time after sRC was 10.9 years. Overall survival and recurrence‐free survival were the primary outcomes of interest. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors after sRC. RESULTS The median time from PC to sRC was 1.6 years. Median age at sRC was 64 years. Peri‐operative mortality was 2.8%. After sRC, 44 patients (61.2%) had pathologically organ‐confined disease, 14 patients (19.4%) extravesical disease and 14 patients (19.4%) lymph node positive disease. Five‐year recurrence‐free survival and overall survival following sRC were 56% and 41%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, the presence of pathological tumor stage ≥pT3a (hazard ratio 6.86, P < 0.001) and the presence of lymph node metastases (hazard ratio 8.78, P < 0.001) were associated with increased risk of recurrence after sRC. CONCLUSIONS sRC can provide prolonged survival following failure of PC. Prognosis, however, is highly dependent on pathological tumour stage and nodal status at sRC. Only 15% of patients with locally advanced recurrent disease were salvaged by sRC.

No abstract

No abstract