Search

Objectives: During holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HOLEP), blunt dissection (BD) by pushing the tip of the scope may exert mechanical force on the sphincter that could be avoided by adopting laser dissection (LD). This study evaluates the continence recovery in consecutive patients who underwent BD and LD., Methods: A prospective cohort of patients who underwent LD was compared with a retrospective control that underwent BD. In both groups, early apical release was performed, and the adenoma was split at 12 O'clock after complete enucleation. In LD, a trans-capsular plane was sharply created by LD and is guided by the circular capsular fibers. A mechanical push with the resectoscope tip was used to create and maintain the ideal surgical plane in the BD group while the laser energy was used to achieve timely hemostasis. The primary outcome was stress urinary incontinence (SUI), defined as the need to use any number of pads, immediately after catheter removal, at 1 week and 1 month postoperatively., Results: Consecutive 51 (48.6%) and 54 (51.4%) patients underwent BD and LD, respectively. The LD group tends to be older while other demographics were comparable. Both groups were comparable regarding the estimated prostate volume, enucleation time, and postoperative resolution of symptoms. Continence recovery was in favor of the LD group immediately after removing the catheter (77.8% vs. 43.1%; p < 0.001), at 1 week (92.6% vs. 66.7%; p = 0.002), with no significant difference at 1 month (98.1% vs. 88.2%; p = 0.06)., Conclusions: LD tends to have favorable early continence recovery compared with BD mostly because of less mechanical stress. Minimizing the periods of blunt pushes during the enucleation might benefit continence recovery., (© 2025 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Objectives: To summarize the available evidence of crack formation in teeth and to discuss the limitations of the current clinical diagnostic modalities for crack detection in teeth., Background: Cracks are a common clinical finding in teeth and yet clinicians still struggle to identify the full extent and orientation of cracks for their appropriate timely management. The biomechanics of crack development can be due to multiple factors and can differ from an unrestored tooth to a restored or endodontically treated tooth., Data & Sources: This narrative review has been designed following the guidelines published by Green et al. 2006 [1] Published literature in the English language that addresses the objectives of this review up to July 2022 was sourced from online databases and reference lists. The relevance of the papers was assessed and discussed by two reviewers. A total of 101 publications were included in this narrative review., Conclusions: The initiation and development of cracks in teeth are likely linked to an interplay between the masticatory forces and fracture resistance of the remaining tooth structure. From the identified literature, the quality and quantity of remaining tooth structure in a restored or endodontically-treated tooth affects the biomechanics of crack development compared to an unrestored tooth. The extent, orientation, and size of the cracks do affect a clinician's ability to detect cracks in teeth. There is still a need to develop reliable diagnostic tools that will accurately identify cracks in teeth beneath restorations to enable effective monitoring of their propagation and provide appropriate interventions., Clinical Significance: The development and propagation of cracks in an unrestored tooth differ greatly from a restored and endodontically treated tooth; mainly linked to the quantity and quality of the remaining tooth structure and the forces acting on them. Identifying the extent of cracks in teeth remains challenging for early clinical intervention., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper, (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare no funding or conflicts of interest.

Thoracoplasty was invented for removing cavities between thoracic wall and remnant lung or mediastinum. It was initially used in cases of tuberculosis or unspecific infections, while currently it is used mainly for space problems after lobectomy/pneumonectomy.This article presents an overview of the historical and current techniques of this surgical procedure.Nowadays, thoracoplasty is rarely performed due to the low incidence of diseases for which this method is necessary. Therefore, this method has even been discredited. Furthermore, certain technical aspects of the thoracoplasty are not very well known because of the infrequent application of this procedure.Unfortunately, a look into the literature of thoracoplasty is not always usefull due to the biased views of advocates of different techniques such as Schede's thoracoplasty, Heller's Jalousie-Plastik, Alexander's extramusculoperiosteal thoracoplasty, Bjork's osteoplastic thoracoplasty, etc.Not to forget, there has always been a lack of research on the relevance and on the several techniques of thoracoplasty.The point is precise indication and correct execution of thoracoplasty as a final therapeutic option, which allows a safe and definitive solution of the space problem even in complex cases, without creating serious functional and cosmetic impairment for the patient.The main types of thoracoplasty are described in this article. Although the core principle of this operation remains unchanged, modern techniques are often cosmetically more considerable and less destructive, compared with techniques that were used in the past., Competing Interests: None declared., (Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)