1,721,104 research outputs found

    Robotic laparoendoscopic single-site radical prostatectomy (R-LESS-RP) with daVinci Single-Site® platform. Concept and evolution of the technique following an IDEAL phase 1

    No full text
    To describe the evolution of robotic laparoendoscopic single-site radical prostatectomy (R-LESS-RP) performed with the daVinci Single-Site Platform® and a home-made multiport aimed to overcome classical drawbacks of LESS, still present with this platform. Between 09/2015 and 06/2017 12 patients underwent R-LESS RP for clinical localized prostate cancer. Following a “phase 1 (development-stage)” innovation, development, exploration, assessment, long-term study (IDEAL) framework, different solutions were drawn to overcome drawbacks of daVinci Single-Site Platform®, included 3 (A, B, and C) multi-ports developed and evaluated in term of advantages/drawbacks concerning ergonomy. The end points of this study were: feasibility, safety, efficacy, by reporting rational description of multiports configuration, demographics, perioperative variables, functional and oncological results. Semi-flexible robotic 5-mm needle-holder instead of Maryland forceps, 30° lenses up and barbed-suture allowed overcoming limits of robotic-platform. Multiport-C (GelPOINT Advanced-Access® and an extra 8-mm robotic trocar outside the multiport) showed the best compromise to ensure both surgeon and bed-side assistant to reproduce a standard robotic procedure. No conversion to either standard robotic or open technique or intraoperative complications occur in any case. Two patients experienced “high-grade” Clavien-Dindo complications. After 12.4 months follow-up, all patients were continent without any sign of biochemical relapse and among 5 preoperative potent patients submitted to nerve-sparing dissection, 4 reported good erectile-function. R-LESS-RP is feasible and safe in the hands of experienced minimally-invasive surgeons. Do date, we recommend a hybrid solution with a home-made multiport and use of an additional standard robotic trocar which allows the use endowrist® technology instruments

    Robotic surgery in urology: a narrative review from the beginning to the single-site

    No full text
    Robotic surgery is a minimally invasive technique that is becoming increasingly popular in surgery and especially in urology. More and more major urological interventions, such as radical prostatectomy and partial nephrectomies, are evolving into laparoscopic and robotic minimally invasive techniques. Robotic surgery itself is constantly evolving in order to improve its performance and minimally invasiveness. A non-systematic literature review was performed using the PubMed/Medline electronic search engine using the following terms: “robotic surgery” or “development of robotic surgery” or “single site surgery” or “single port surgery”. Although it is a very recent technology, some preliminary experiences have been presented in the literature that document the feasibility of some major urological interventions, including radical prostatectomies, radical cystectomy, partial nephrectomy and ureterocystoneostomy. Long-term oncological and functional outcomes are not yet available and require more follow-up. Anyway, the single-port robotic system has proved feasible and safe, although in small cases series. Re-evaluating the development of robotic surgery, with each innovation, it aroused great enthusiasm, leading to a great diffusion of the method before having randomized clinical trials that confirmed the effective improvement of the technique compared to the gold standard. The urological community should not miss the second chance to be able to evaluate an emerging technique based on comparative clinical studies

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Get PDF
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed

    Variations on the Author

    Get PDF
    “Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship

    Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis

    Get PDF
    We provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis

    Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts

    Get PDF
    We conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more sophisticated methods

    Author Index

    No full text
    Nao informado

    ABLATE: a score to predict complications and recurrence rate in percutaneous treatments of renal lesions

    No full text
    RENAL score has been validated on predicting adverse events and relapses in percutaneous treatments of renal lesions. To better fit interventional issues a modified score (mRENAL) has been introduced, but the only difference from the RENAL score is on the dimensional parameter. However, it remains of surgical derivation while a specific interventional score is missing. This study aims to obtain a specific score (ABLATE) to better quantify the risk of complications and relapses in percutaneous kidney ablation procedures compared to the existing surgical scores. Taking inspiration from previous papers, a score was built to quantify the real difficulties faced in percutaneous treatment of renal lesions. The ABLATE score was used on 71 cryoablations to evaluate its predictivity of complications and relapses. Logistic regression was used to predict complication incidence; Cox-regression was used for relapses; ROC analysis was used to evaluate the accuracy of the different scores. Between January 2014 and November 2019, 71 lesions in 68 patients were treated. Overall, malignant histology was found in 62 lesions (87.3%). Mean and median RENAL, mRENAL, and ABLATE scores were 7.04 and 7, 7.19 and 7, and 5.11 and 4, respectively. Out of 71 treatments, we experienced 3 bleeding with anemia (4.2%), only 2 of which needed further treatment (2.82%). The mean and median RENAL, mRENAL, and ABLATE scores in those with complications were 7.66 and 7.01 (p = 0.69), 8.0 and 7.1 (p = 0.54), and 6.6 and 5.0 (p = 0.38), respectively. Out of 62 malignant lesions, we experienced 2 persistent and 6 recurrent lesions (3.2% and 8.4%, respectively). At Cox-regression analyses, mABLATE score outperformed both RENAL and mRENAL scores in predicting recurrences (HR 1.48; p < 0.001 vs. 1.41; p = 0.1 vs. 1.38: p = 0.07, respectively). The ABLATE score showed to be a better predictor of relapses than RENAL and mRENAL. The small number of complications conditioned a lack of statistic power on complications for all the scores. At the moment to quantify the risks in percutaneous kidney ablation procedures, surgical scores are used. A specific score better performs this task

    koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist

    No full text
    We have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
    corecore