METHODS: A qualitative study with purposive sampling was conducted using face-to-face semistructured interviews. A total of 20 participants from a tertiary general hospital in Kuantan, Malaysia, were recruited in this study. Data were analysed using framework analysis.
RESULTS: Two themes emerged from the analysis. The first theme explained the changes in the dietary practice of the participants postdiagnosis. The second theme revealed that the participants' dietary changes were greatly influenced by personal factors and external support from professionals, family and peers.
CONCLUSIONS: Urinary stone patients highlighted the fear of complications, self-determination and knowledge of nutrition as the main drivers of their dietary change postdiagnosis. Emphasising proper nutritional care by assessing and evaluating dietary self-management among patients can facilitate effective self-care in stone prevention management.
CASE PRESENTATION: We report on a 38-year-old female with sialolithiasis whom had Wharton's duct perforation, complicating the sialography. She was treated conservatively with a course of co-amoxiclav, oral prednisolone for three days and pain-killers. The patient was clinically well on follow-up reassessments at the end of the first week and three weeks post procedure.
CONCLUSIONS: Perforation of salivary duct complicating the sialography is rare. Awareness of this potential complication and utilizing a good sialography technique need to be advocated amongst radiologists. Response to treatment by conservative management is preferred as illustrated in this case.
METHODS: Clinico-epidemiological data of patients who underwent PCN and/or RUS in two institutions for calculi-related ureteric obstruction were retrospectively collected from January 2014 to December 2020.
RESULTS: 537 patients (244 patients in PCN group, 293 patients in RUS group) from both institutions were eligible for analysis based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patients with PCN were generally older, had poorer Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status, and larger obstructive ureteral calculi compared to patients with RUS. Patients with PCN had longer durations of fever, the persistence of elevated total white cell and creatinine, and longer hospitalization stays compared with patients who had undergone RUS. RUS up-front has more unsuccessful interventions compared with PCN. There were no significant differences in the change in SOFA score postintervention between the two interventions. In multivariate analysis, the higher temperature just prior to the intervention (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 2.039, p = 0.003) and Cardiovascular SOFA score of 1 (adjusted OR:4.037, p = 0.012) were significant independent prognostic factors for the development of septic shock postdecompression of ureteral obstruction.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study reveals that both interventions have similar overall risk of urosepsis, septic shock and mortality rate. Despite a marginally higher risk of failure, RUS should be considered in patients with lower procedural risk. Patients going for PCN should be counseled for a longer stay. Post-HDU/-ICU monitoring, inotrope support postdecompression should be considered for patients with elevated temperature within 1 h preintervention and cardiovascular SOFA score of 1.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 60 subjects were selected for this study. 40 subjects presented with periodontitis, which included 20 snuff users (SP) and 20 nonsnuff users (NS). 20 periodontally healthy patients formed the controls (healthy control: HC). The clinical parameters recorded were gingival index (GI), plaque index, calculus index, bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), recession (RC), and clinical attachment level (CAL). The IL-1 β and IL-8 levels were assessed through enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (Quantikine(®)). Analysis of variance (ANOVA), post-hoc Tukey's, Kruskal-Walli's ANOVA and Mann-Whitney test was used for comparison among groups and P > 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: No significant difference was seen in levels of IL-1 β and IL-8 between SP and NS groups (P = 0.16, 0.97). However, both the periodontitis groups (SP and NS) had increased IL-β levels when compared to HC group (P = 0.01, 0.001). The snuff users showed significant increase in GI, BOP, RC, and CAL when compared with NS (P = 0.002, 0.001, 0.012, 0.002) whereas NS group had significant increase in PD (P = 0.003).
CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, use of snuff does not affect the host inflammatory response associated with periodontitis and leads to RC and increased CAL due to local irritant effect.