A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Detection of urinary leakage after radical retropubic prostatectomy by contrast enhanced ultrasound - do we still need conventional retrograde cystography? | LitMetric

Introduction: To prospectively evaluate the accuracy of transvesical contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) as an alternative method for the detection of anastomotic leakage after radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) in comparison with the current standard method of conventional retrograde cystography (CG).

Patients And Methods: Forty-three patients underwent RRP for histologically proven localized prostate cancer. The vesico-urethral anastomosis was evaluated 8 days after RRP by CG and CEUS. Any peri-anastomotic leakage was assessed and determined in CG and CEUS as follows: no extravasation (EV), small leakage (≤0.5 cm), moderate leakage (>0.5 cm to ≤2 cm), large leakage (>2 cm diameter of EV seen).

Results: In total, 21 (49%) patients showed a watertight anastomosis. Ten (23%), two (4.7%) and ten (23%) patients showed a small, intermediate and large EV, respectively. In 31 cases (72%) there was 100% agreement of CG and CEUS for detection of no, moderate and large EV, respectively. In nine cases a small and in two cases a moderate EV was categorized as watertight anastomosis by CEUS. Only in one case did CG detect a small EV where a large EV was detected in CEUS. The agreement between both methods was 95% for detecting absence or large leakages.

Conclusion: CEUS is a promising imaging modality that seems to be equivalent to CG for detecting the presence of a large anastomotic leakage that is clinically relevant for postoperative persistence of the indwelling catheter. CEUS could be a cheap and time-saving alternative to the CG without exposure of the patient to radiation.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09497.xDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

leakage radical
8
radical retropubic
8
retropubic prostatectomy
8
conventional retrograde
8
ceus
8
anastomotic leakage
8
watertight anastomosis
8
ten 23%
8
large cases
8
leakage
7

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!