Search

Purpose of Review : To provide an overview of the technologic advancements in the field of ablative therapy, focusing on the treatment of renal neoplasms. Materials and Methods : A MEDLINE search was performed using each specific ablative technique name as the search term. Articles written in the English language were selected for review. In cases of multiple reports by a single institution, the most recent report was utilized. Pertinent articles specific to the technologic advancement in ablative therapy were selected for review. Recent Findings : Intermediate-term oncologic outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and cryoablation (CA) for the treatment of small renal masses are encouraging. For thermal therapies, molecular adjuvants to enhance cellular kill and local control have been developed. Improvements in microwave technology have allowed for reductions in antenna size and increases in ablation size. Laparoscopic high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) probes have been developed to overcome the limitations of transcutaneous energy delivery, but HIFU remains experimental for the treatment of renal lesions. Irreversible electroporation (IRE), a novel nonthermal ablative technique, is currently undergoing clinical investigation in human subjects. Histotripsy causes mechanical destruction of targeted tissue and shows promise in treating renal and prostate pathology. Summary : Ablative techniques are commonly utilized in the primary treatment of urologic malignancies. The purpose of this review is to discuss technologic advances in ablative therapies with emphasis on the treatment of renal masses. RFA and CA show acceptable intermediate-term efficacy and technical refinement continues. Emerging technologies, including microwave thermotherapy, IRE, HIFU and histotripsy, are described with emphasis on the mechanism of cellular kill, energy delivery, and stage in clinical development.

Aims: To investigate the self-reported impact of COVID-19 measures on access to testing for HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and condoms and factors associated with reduced access among adults in Sweden., Methods: Cross-sectional data were collected in late 2020 through a web panel with adults (18-49 years) in Sweden as part of the International Sexual Health And REproductive health survey (I-SHARE) ( N =1307). The primary outcome was self-reported access to HIV/STI testing and condoms during COVID-19 measures. Logistic regression was used to assess adjusted odds ratios of experiencing reduced access to HIV/STI testing and condoms in relation to sociodemographic characteristics, changes in sexual behaviours and COVID-19-related factors., Results: Of the 1138 sexually active respondents, 17% wanted an HIV/STI test, and of those over half (57%) reported reduced access during the COVID-19 measures in 2020. Compared with cis-women, transgender or non-binary respondents were more likely to experience lower access to testing. Among those who usually used condoms ( n =568), 23% reported hampered condom access due to COVID-19 restrictions. Reduced condom access was associated with identifying as non-cis gender and a cis-man compared with cis-woman, non-heterosexual orientation, being foreign-born and financially worried., Conclusions: Findings indicate that access to HIV/STI testing and condoms among sexually active adults of reproductive age in Sweden was disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 with varied impact depending on sexual orientation, gender identity or socioeconomic situation. This signals the importance of ensuring equitable access to sexual and reproductive health services and commodities in future crises response., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: Immigrant women's challenges in realizing sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) are exacerbated by the lack of knowledge regarding how to tailor post-partum contraceptive services to their needs. Therefore, the overall aim of the IMPROVE-it project is to promote equity in SRHR through improvement of contraceptive services with and for immigrant women, and, thus, to strengthen women's possibility to choose and initiate effective contraceptive methods post-partum., Methods: This Quality Improvement Collaborative (QIC) on contraceptive services and use will combine a cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) with a process evaluation. The cRCT will be conducted at 28 maternal health clinics (MHCs) in Sweden, that are the clusters and unit of randomization, and include women attending regular post-partum visits within 16 weeks post birth. Utilizing the Breakthrough Series Collaborative model, the study's intervention strategies include learning sessions, action periods, and workshops informed by joint learning, co-design, and evidence-based practices. The primary outcome, women's choice of an effective contraceptive method within 16 weeks after giving birth, will be measured using the Swedish Pregnancy Register (SPR). Secondary outcomes regarding women's experiences of contraceptive counselling, use and satisfaction of chosen contraceptive method will be evaluated using questionnaires completed by participating women at enrolment, 6 and 12 months post enrolment. The outcomes including readiness, motivation, competence and confidence will be measured through project documentation and questionnaires. The project's primary outcome involving women's choice of contraceptive method will be estimated by using a logistic regression analysis. A multivariate analysis will be performed to control for age, sociodemographic characteristics, and reproductive history. The process evaluation will be conducted using recordings from learning sessions, questionnaires aimed at participating midwives, intervention checklists and project documents., Discussion: The intervention's co-design activities will meaningfully include immigrants in implementation research and allow midwives to have a direct, immediate impact on improving patient care. This study will also provide evidence as to what extent, how and why the QIC was effective in post-partum contraceptive services., Trial Registration: NCT05521646, August 30, 2022., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

There is a male sex disadvantage in morbidity and mortality due to COVID-19. Proposed explanations to this disparity include gender-related health behaviors, differential distribution of comorbidities and biological sex differences. In this study, we investigated the association between sex and risk of severe COVID-19 while adjusting for comorbidities, socioeconomic factors, as well as unmeasured factors shared by cohabitants which are often left unadjusted. We conducted a total-population-based cohort study (n = 1,854,661) based on individual-level register data. Cox models was used to estimate the associations between sex and risk for severe COVID-19. We additionally used a within-household design and conditional Cox models aiming to account for unmeasured factors shared by cohabitants. A secondary aim was to compare the risk of COVID-19 related secondary outcomes between men and women hospitalized due to COVID-19 using logistic regression. Men were at higher risk for hospitalization (HR = 1.63;95%CI = 1.57-1.68), ICU admission (HR = 2.63;95%CI = 2.38-2.91) and death (HR = 1.81;95%CI = 1.68-1.95) due to COVID-19, based on fully adjusted models. However, the effect of sex varied significantly across age groups: Among people in their 50s, men had > four times higher risk of COVID-19 death. The within-household design did not provide any further explanation to the sex disparity. Among patients hospitalized due to COVID-19, men had an increased risk for viral pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute respiratory insufficiency, acute kidney injury, and sepsis which persisted in fully adjusted models. Recognition of the combined effect of sex and age on COVID-19 outcomes has implications for policy strategies to reduce the adverse effects of the disease., (© 2022. The Author(s).)