Clinical School (Austin Health) - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2
-
ItemRadiotherapy-related complications presenting to a urology department: a more common problem than previously thought?(WILEY, 2018-05)OBJECTIVE: To quantify the burden of the side effects of radiotherapy on a tertiary referral urology department. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective study of all urology admissions to a public urology department at a tertiary hospital in a 6-month period was performed. Patients admitted with complications attributable to radiotherapy were included in the study. Data obtained included patient demographics, radiotherapy details, complication type and management required. RESULTS: A total of 1198 patients were admitted; 921 (77%) were elective and 277 (23%) were emergency admissions. Thirteen out of the 921 (1.4%) elective admissions and 20 out of the 277 (7.2%) emergency admissions were attributable to radiotherapy complications. Radiotherapy complications was the fourth most common reason for emergency admission, ahead of acute urinary retention. These 33 admissions were accounted for by 21 patients. A total of 39 separate complications attributable to radiotherapy were diagnosed, with some patients having multiple complications. The median (interquartile range) time to onset of complications was 4 (1-9) years. The surgical intervention rate was 67%. The commonest procedures were washout with/without clot evacuation or diathermy in theatre (15.8%) and urethral dilatation/bladder neck incision (15.8%). Two urinary diversions and two cystoprostatectomies plus urinary diversion were performed. CONCLUSION: Radiotherapy complications are consequential and account for a substantial proportion of a tertiary urology department's emergency workload. These complications generally occur years after radiotherapy and frequently require surgical intervention.
-
ItemThree dimensional models in uro-oncology: a future built with additive fabrication(SPRINGER, 2018-04)PURPOSE: Three-dimensional (3D) printing was invented in 1983 but has only just begun to influence medicine and surgery. Conversion of digital images into physical models demonstrates promise to revolutionize multiple domains of surgery. In the field of uro-oncology, researchers and clinicians have recognized the potential of this technology and are working towards making it an integral part of urological practice. We review current literature regarding 3D printing and other 3D technology in the field of urology. METHOD: A comprehensive assessment of contemporary literature was performed according to a modified PRISMA analysis for the purposes of this narrative review article. Medical databases that were searched included: Web of Science, EMBASE and Cochrane databases. Articles assessed were limited only to English-language peer-reviewed articles published between 1980 and 2017. The search terms used were "3D", "3-dimensional", "printing", "printing technology", "urology", "surgery". Acceptable articles were reviewed and incorporated for their merit and relevance with preference given for articles with high impact, original research and recent advances. RESULTS: Thirty-five publications were included in final analysis and discussion. CONCLUSIONS: The area of 3D printing in Urology shows promising results, but further research is required and cost reduction must occur before clinicians fully embrace its use. As costs continue to decline and diversity of materials continues to expand, research and clinical utilization will increase. Recent advances have demonstrated the potential of this technology in the realms of education and surgical optimization. The generation of personalized organs using 3D printing scaffolding remains the 'holy grail' of this technology.