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.
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.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between June 2011 and May 2012, 20 patients with upper urinary tract stones were included in this prospective randomized study. The patients were assigned into the LESS group or CL group in a one-on-one manner using a random table. The clinical parameters were evaluated in the immediate postoperative period, and the stone clearance rate was evaluated via non-contrast computer tomography at one month postoperatively.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in patient demographics or preoperative stone sizes between the two groups. The perioperative parameters, including operative time, estimated blood loss, postoperative pain scores, length of hospital stay, and changes in renal function, were comparable. No transfusions or open conversions were required in either group. The incidence of residual stones was lower in the LESS group (1 case) than in the CL group (2 cases). However, this difference was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: For large and impacted upper ureteral stones, the effectiveness and safety of LESS were equivalent to those of CL. Further randomized control trials with larger sample sizes are needed to strengthen the conclusions of this study. .