MyMedR

Displaying all 4 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Fulltext The Urological Association of Asia clinical guideline for urinary stone disease

Taguchi K, Cho SY, Ng AC, Usawachintachit M, Tan YK, Deng YL, et al.

Int J Urol, 2019 07;26(7):688-709.
PMID: 31016804 DOI: 10.1111/iju.13957

The Urological Association of Asia, consisting of 25 member associations and one affiliated member since its foundation in 1990, has planned to develop Asian guidelines for all urological fields. The field of stone diseases is the third of its guideline projects. Because of the different climates, and social, economic and ethnic environments, the clinical practice for urinary stone diseases widely varies among the Asian countries. The committee members of the Urological Association of Asia on the clinical guidelines for urinary stone disease carried out a surveillance study to better understand the diversity of the treatment strategy among different regions and subsequent systematic literature review through PubMed and MEDLINE database between 1966 and 2017. Levels of evidence and grades of recommendation for each management were decided according to the relevant strategy. Each clinical question and answer were thoroughly reviewed and discussed by all committee members and their colleagues, with suggestions from expert representatives of the American Urological Association and European Association of Urology. However, we focused on the pragmatic care of patients and our own evidence throughout Asia, which included recent surgical trends, such as miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy and endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery. This guideline covers all fields of stone diseases, from etiology to recurrence prevention. Here, we present a short summary of the first version of the guideline - consisting 43 clinical questions - and overview its key practical issues.
European Association of Urology Section of Urolithiasis and International Alliance of Urolithiasis Joint Consensus on Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for the Management of Renal Stones

Zeng G, Zhao Z, Mazzon G, Pearle M, Choong S, Skolarikos A, et al.

Eur Urol Focus, 2022 Sep;8(5):1461-1468.
PMID: 34836838 DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.10.011

BACKGROUND: Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) has become the preferred treatment modality for nephrolithiasis. However, because of ongoing uncertainties regarding the optimal perioperative management, operative technique, and postoperative follow-up, as well as a lack of standardization for outcome reporting, consensus is needed to achieve more uniform clinical practice worldwide.
OBJECTIVE: To develop recommendations for RIRS on the basis of existing data and expert consensus.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A protocol-driven, three-phase study was conducted by the European Association of Urology Section of Urolithiasis (EULIS) and the International Alliance of Urolithiasis (IAU). The process included: (1) a nonsystematic review of the literature to define domains for discussion; (2) a two-round modified Delphi survey involving experts in this field; and (3) an additional group meeting and third-round survey involving 64 senior representative members to formulate the final conclusions.
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The results from each previous round were returned to the participants for re-evaluation of their decisions during the next round. The agreement threshold was set at 70%.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The panel included 209 participants who developed 29 consensus statements on the following topics of interest: (1) perioperative infection management; (2) perioperative antithrombotic therapy; (3) fundamentals of the operative technique; and (4) standardized outcome reporting. Although this consensus can be considered as a useful reference for more clinically oriented daily practice, we also acknowledge that a higher level of evidence from further clinical trials is needed.
CONCLUSIONS: The consensus statements aim to guide and standardize clinical practice and research on RIRS and to recommend standardized outcome reporting.
PATIENT SUMMARY: An international consensus on the best practice for minimally invasive surgery for kidney stones was organized and developed by two international societies. It is anticipated that this consensus will provide further guidance to urologists and may help to improve clinical outcomes for patients.
International Alliance of Urolithiasis (IAU) consensus on miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Zeng GH, Zhong W, Mazzon G, Zhu W, Lahme S, Khadgi S, et al.

Mil Med Res, 2024 Oct 28;11(1):70.
PMID: 39465407 DOI: 10.1186/s40779-024-00562-3

Over the past three decades, there has been increasing interest in miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) techniques featuring smaller tracts as they offer potential solutions to mitigate complications associated with standard PCNL (sPCNL). However, despite this growing acceptance and recognition of its benefits, unresolved controversies and acknowledged limitations continue to impede widespread adoption due to a lack of consensus on optimal perioperative management strategies and procedural tips and tricks. In response to these challenges, an international panel comprising experts from the International Alliance of Urolithiasis (IAU) took on the task of compiling an expert consensus document on mPCNL procedures aimed at providing urologists with a comprehensive clinical framework for practice. This endeavor involved conducting a systematic literature review to identify research gaps (RGs), which formed the foundation for developing a structured questionnaire survey. Subsequently, a two-round modified Delphi survey was implemented, culminating in a group meeting to generate final evidence-based comments. All 64 experts completed the second-round survey, resulting in a response rate of 100.0%. Fifty-eight key questions were raised focusing on mPCNLs within 4 main domains, including general information (13 questions), preoperative work-up (13 questions), procedural tips and tricks (19 questions), and postoperative evaluation and follow-up (13 questions). Additionally, 9 questions evaluated the experts' experience with PCNLs. Consensus was reached on 30 questions after the second-round survey, while professional statements for the remaining 28 key questions were provided after discussion in an online panel meeting. mPCNL, characterized by a tract smaller than 18 Fr and an innovative lithotripsy technique, has firmly established itself as a viable and effective approach for managing upper urinary tract stones in both adults and pediatrics. It offers several advantages over sPCNL including reduced bleeding, fewer requirements for nephrostomy tubes, decreased pain, and shorter hospital stays. The series of detailed techniques presented here serve as a comprehensive guide for urologists, aiming to improve their procedural understanding and optimize patient outcomes.
Fulltext Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1

Klionsky DJ, Abdel-Aziz AK, Abdelfatah S, Abdellatif M, Abdoli A, Abel S, et al.

Autophagy, 2021 Jan;17(1):1-382.
PMID: 33634751 DOI: 10.1080/15548627.2020.1797280

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field.