Methods: We described three different surgical techniques for correction of penile paraffinoma based on our single-centre experience. Informed consents were obtained from patients whose photographs were taken during the operation step.
Results: In general, three patients had simple excision biopsy with primary suturing, four patients underwent single stage excision of circumferential granuloma with bilateral scrotal skin flap reconstruction and one patient experienced dual stage procedure. Three of them were injected with paraffin, one with silicone and the remaining four were unable to identify the substance used. All patients successfully underwent the surgical procedure and four of them had minor post-operative surgical site infection and wound gapping.
Conclusion: All patients recovered well and the mean International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) score obtained was 24.25. In our experience, excision biopsy was adequate for focal mass and reconstructive surgery using bilateral scrotal flap was suitable for circumferential mass.
METHODS: This was a prospective, randomised, observer-blinded study. Two keloids on the same site were randomly assigned to receive either daily topical clobetasol propionate 0.05% cream under occlusion with silicone dressing (Scar 1) or monthly IL triamcinolone injection (Scar 2). Efficacy was assessed using patient and observer scar assessment scale (POSAS) at 4-weekly intervals up to 12 weeks. Dimension of keloid and adverse effects were also assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 34 scars from 17 patients completed the study. There was significant improvement of POSAS at 12 weeks compared to baseline within each treatment group. However, there was no statistically significant difference in POSAS at 12 weeks between the two treatments. Keloid dimensions showed a similar trend of improvement by week 12 with either treatment (p = 0.002 in Scar 1, p = 0.005 for Scar 2). However, there was no significant difference between the treatment. In the IL triamcinolone group, all patients reported pain and 70.6% observed necrotic skin reaction. There was a significantly higher rate of adverse effects such as erythema (41.2 vs. 17.6%), hypopigmentation (35.3 vs. 23.5%), telangiectasia (41.2 vs. 17.6%) and skin atrophy (23.5 vs. 5.9%) documented in the IL triamcinolone group when compared to clobetasol propionate 0.05% cream under occlusion with silicone dressing.
CONCLUSION: Clobetasol propionate 0.05% cream under occlusion with silicone dressing is equally effective and has fewer adverse effects compared to IL triamcinolone. Hence, it may be used as an alternative treatment for keloid particularly in patients with low pain threshold, needle phobia and those who prefers home-based treatment.
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study.
METHODS: Looped liners with hook fastener and Iceross Dermo Liner with pin/lock system were mechanically tested using a tensile testing machine in terms of system safety. A total of 10 transtibial amputees participated in this study and were asked to use these two different suspension systems. The pistoning was measured between the liner and socket through a photographic method. Three static axial loading conditions were implemented, namely, 30, 60, and 90 N. Furthermore, subjective feedback was obtained.
RESULTS: Tensile test results showed that both systems could safely tolerate the load applied to the prosthesis during ambulation. Clinical evaluation confirmed extremely low pistoning in both systems (i.e. less than 0.4 cm after adding 90 N traction load to the prosthesis). Subjective feedback also showed satisfaction with both systems. However, less traction at the end of the residual limb was reported while looped liner was used.
CONCLUSION: The looped liner with hook fastener is safe and a good alternative for individuals with transtibial amputation as this system could solve some problems with the current systems. Clinical relevance The looped liner and hook fastener were shown to be good alternative suspension for people with lower limb amputation especially those who have difficulty to use and align the pin/lock systems. This system could safely tolerate centrifugal forces applied to the prosthesis during normal and fast walking.
METHODS: This is a prospective observational study of 201 patients who underwent endoscopic nasojejunal wire-guided feeding tube insertions for obstruction of either the esophagus or the stomach including both benign and malignant pathologies between January 2015 to June 2018 in Hospital Sungai Buloh and Hospital Sultanah Aminah, Malaysia. The indications for tube insertion, insertion technique, and tube-related problems were described.
RESULTS: The nasojejunal tube was used to establish enteral feeding in patients with obstructing tumors of the distal esophagus in 65 patients (32.3%) and gastric outlet obstruction in 72 patients (35.8%). There were 54 patients (26.9%) who required reinsertion. The most common reason for reinsertion was unintentional dislodgement, where 32 patients (15.9%) followed by tube blockage 20 patients (10.0%). Using our method of advancement under direct vision, we had only 2 cases of malposition due to severely deformed anatomy. We had no incidence of aspiration in this group of patients and overall, the patients tolerated the tube well.
CONCLUSIONS: The novel nasojejunal feeding tube with gastric decompression function is a safe and effective method of delivery of enteral nutrition in patients with upper gastrointestinal obstruction. These tubes if inserted properly are well tolerated with almost no risk of malposition and are tolerated well even for prolonged periods of time until definitive surgery could be performed.