3 results on '"Aquilini, Massimo"'
Search Results
2. Treatment of 2-4 cm kidney stones: multicentre experience. Comparison of safety, efficacy, and costs of percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery.
- Author
-
Fiorello, Nicolò, Di Benedetto, Andrea, Mogorovich, Andrea, Summonti, Daniele, Aquilini, Massimo, Silvestri, Giuseppe, Gilli, Chiara, Romei, Gregorio, Santarsieri, Michele, Manassero, Francesca, Pomara, Giorgio, Benvenuti, Sandro, and Sepich, Carlo Alberto
- Subjects
SURGICAL complications ,KIDNEY surgery ,MEDICAL care costs ,ENDOUROLOGY ,OPERATIVE surgery - Abstract
Introduction The objective of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy, through the stone-free rate (SFR), as well as the costs, between retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), for 2-4 cm kidney stones. Material and methods We analysed the data relating to RIRS and PCNL performed in 3 reference centres for kidney stones, in the period between 1/2019 and 12/2021. The total number of procedures was 130 (63 RIRS and 67 PCNL). We defined SFR as the absence of lithiasic fragments or stones <3 mm. Results were compared between 2 groups depending on the stone size: 2-3 cm stones (group 1) and >3 cm stones (group 2). Results The duration of RIRS was 90 minutes for group 1 and 115 minutes for group 2, and for PCNL it was 135 minutes for group 1 and 145 minutes for group 2. RIRS had shorter duration with a significant difference in group 1 (p = 0.000014). SFR for RIRS was 78% for group 1 and 21% for group 2, and for PCNL it was 92% for group 1 and 81% for group 2. Therefore, there is a statistically significant difference, which is more evident for 3 cm and multiple stones (p = 0.0057 for group 1, p = 0.000146 for group 2). The difference in costs was estimated by calculating the expected costs for a single surgical procedure and the estimated cost per day for ordinary hospitalization. Conclusions 2-4 cm stones can be safely treated with both RIRS and PCNL, but RIRS should not be chosen as an option for stones >3 cm, except in selected cases. PCNL remains the gold standard for the treatment of complex stones, especially for stones >3 cm. Risk of postoperative complications is higher in PCNL, even if this difference is not great. The costs associated with RIRS, even when recalculating with the need for new treatments, remain cheaper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. Conceptual design report. A 250 GHz radio frequency CARM source for plasma fusiom
- Author
-
Zito, Pietro, Turtù, Simonetta, Tuccillo, Angelo A., Tilia, Benedetto, Sabschevski, Svilen, Spassovsky, Ivan, Savilovc, Andrey V., Sabia, Elio, Rocchi, Giuliano, Ravera, Gian Luca, Raspante, Bernardo, Polenta, Stefano, Pizzuto, Aldo, Petrolini, Piero, Petralia, Alberto, Peskovc, Nikolai Y., Pagnutti, Simonetta, Nguyen, Federico, Mirizzi, Francesco, Mezi, Luca, Maffia, Giuseppe, Licciardi, Silvia, Lampasi, Alessandro, Glyavin, Mikhail Y., Giovenale, Emilio, Ginzburg, Naum S., Gallerano, Gian Piero, Doria, Andrea, Di Pace, Luigi, Di Palma, Emanuele, Di Giovenale, Sergio, De Meis, Domenico, Dattoli, Giuseppe, Ciocci, Franco, Ceccuzzi, Silvio, Carpanese, Mariano, Cappelli, Mauro, Campana, Ezio, Aquilini, Massimo, Artioli, Marcello, Zito, Pietro, Turtù, Simonetta, Tuccillo, Angelo A., Tilia, Benedetto, Sabschevski, Svilen, Spassovsky, Ivan, Savilovc, Andrey V., Sabia, Elio, Rocchi, Giuliano, Ravera, Gian Luca, Raspante, Bernardo, Polenta, Stefano, Pizzuto, Aldo, Petrolini, Piero, Petralia, Alberto, Peskovc, Nikolai Y., Pagnutti, Simonetta, Nguyen, Federico, Mirizzi, Francesco, Mezi, Luca, Maffia, Giuseppe, Licciardi, Silvia, Lampasi, Alessandro, Glyavin, Mikhail Y., Giovenale, Emilio, Ginzburg, Naum S., Gallerano, Gian Piero, Doria, Andrea, Di Pace, Luigi, Di Palma, Emanuele, Di Giovenale, Sergio, De Meis, Domenico, Dattoli, Giuseppe, Ciocci, Franco, Ceccuzzi, Silvio, Carpanese, Mariano, Cappelli, Mauro, Campana, Ezio, Aquilini, Massimo, and Artioli, Marcello
- Subjects
Plasma fusion ,Electron beam shaping and transport ,Cyclotron Auto Resonance Maser (CARM) ,Electron Cyclotron Range of Frequency (ECRF) - Abstract
Questa pubblicazione rappresenta il “conceptual design report” per una sorgente a radiofrequenza di tipo CARM (Cyclotron auto resonance maser) operante a 250 GHz e progettata per attività di ricerca sul plasma. Lo studio è finalizzato alla pianificazione della costruzione di un dispositivo di tipo CARM nel Centro ENEA di Frascati, nell’ambito di ricerche concernenti la fusione nucleare. Le attività contemplate nel progetto raccolgono assieme differenti competenze tradizionalmente presenti all’interno dell’ENEA e, oltre la già citata fusione, riguardano la scienza e tecnologia degli acceleratori di particelle, la gestione e il trasporto dei fasci di particelle cariche, la superconduttività. Il documento prende in considerazione i vari particolari del progetto ed è diviso in due parti. La prima include la descrizione generale dell’intero sistema, tra l’altro presentando le ragioni a supporto della scelta del CARM, i presupposti teorici, le ragioni della la scelta dei parametri di operazione e le prestazioni attese dalla sorgente stessa. Nella seconda parte del testo sono riportati i dettagli costruttivi e ogni aspetto è adeguatamente descritto negli annessi tecnici: il progetto del catodo, la formazione e il trasporto del fascio di elettroni; le caratteristiche della alimentazione elettrica e della linea formatrice di impulso; il magnete superconduttore e le caratteristiche della cavità del CARM; lo sviluppo dei codici di calcolo per l’analisi delle prestazioni RF della sorgente., We present the conceptual design for a Cyclotron Auto Resonance Maser source, operating at 250 GHz and conceived for Plasma Fusion research ac- tivities. The study discussed here is aimed at planning the construction of such a device at the ENEA Frascati Center, within the framework of the researches pertaining to the Fusion department. This foreseen activity gather together different skills traditionally present in the Agency and including Fusion, ac- celerator technology, beam handling and transport, superconductivity. . . The report covers the different details of the project and is devided in two parts. The first contains a general description of the entire system, furthermore it describes the motivations underlying the choice of the de- vice, the relevant theoretical foundations, the reasons for the choice of the operating parameters and the expected performances of the source. In the second part the project details are reported and each constituting item is properly described in the technical annexes. We discuss indeed the cathode design and the electron beam shaping and transport, we report on the power supply and electrical pulse forming line, on the Superconduct- ing magnet and CARM cavity characteristics. Finally we discuss the code development effort for the analysis of the radiation output performances.
- Published
- 2016
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.