In light of recently published international guidelines concerning the diagnosis, treatment, and aftercare of urethral strictures and stenoses, the objective of this study was to synthesize an overview of guideline recommendations provided by the American Urological Association (AUA, 2023), the Société Internationale d\'Urologie (SIU, 2010), and the European Association of Urology (EAU, 2023). The recommendations offered by these three associations, as well as the guidelines addressing urethral trauma from the EAU, AUA, and the Urological Society of India (USI), were assessed in terms of their guidance on posterior urethral stenosis. On the whole, the recommendations from the various guidelines exhibit considerable alignment. However, SIU and EAU place a stronger emphasis on the role of repeated endoscopic treatment compared to AUA. The preferred approach for managing radiation-induced bulbomembranous stenosis remains a subject of debate. Furthermore, endoscopic treatments enhanced with intralesional therapies may potentially serve as a significant treatment modality for addressing even fully obliterated stenoses.
UNASSIGNED: Die vorliegende Arbeit verfolgte das Ziel, angesichts der kürzlich veröffentlichten internationalen Leitlinien zur Diagnose, Therapie und Nachsorge von Harnröhrenstrikturen und -stenosen eine Zusammenfassung der Empfehlungen der American Urological Association (AUA, 2023), der Société Internationale d’Urologie (SIU, 2010) und der European Association of Urology (EAU, 2023) zu erstellen. Die Empfehlungen dieser drei urologischen Gesellschaften sowie die Leitlinien zu Harnröhrentraumata der EAU, AUA und der Urological Society of India (USI) wurden hinsichtlich ihrer Therapiestrategien für posteriore Harnröhrenstenosen ausgewertet. Insgesamt zeigen sich weitgehende Übereinstimmungen in den Empfehlungen der verschiedenen Leitlinien. Im Vergleich zur AUA betonen SIU und EAU jedoch die Bedeutung wiederholter endoskopischer Behandlungen stärker. Die optimale Therapie für strahleninduzierte bulbomembranöse Stenosen bleibt ein kontrovers diskutiertes Thema. Zusätzlich könnten erweiterte endoskopische Behandlungen mit intraläsionalen Therapien eine wichtige Rolle bei der Behandlung von vollständig obliterierten Strikturen spielen.

This clinical consensus document addresses the assessment, selection, and fitting considerations for non-surgical bone conduction hearing devices (BCHD) for children under the age of 5 years identified as having unilateral or bilateral, permanent conductive or mixed hearing losses. Children with profound unilateral sensorineural hearing losses are not addressed. The document was developed based on evidence review and consensus by The Paediatric Bone Conduction Working Group, which is composed of audiologists from North America who have experience working with BCHDs in children. The document aims to provide clinical direction for an area of paediatric audiology practice that is under development and is therefore lacking in standard protocols or guidelines. This work may serve as a basis for future research and clinical contributions to support prospective paediatric audiology practices.

Remote intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is defined as an ICH that occurs at a distant site from the treated lesion and is a considerable post-neurointerventional complication. Because such a life-threatening complication should not be neglected, we report our experience with delayed remote ICH in a patient with symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ICAS) treated by Wingspan stenting following on-label usage guidelines. A middle-aged person suffered a lobar-type subcortical hemorrhage on the left temporal lobe 22 days after Wingspan stenting in the left internal carotid artery. The present case seemed to correspond with a previous report in which remote ICH tended to occur as an ipsilateral lobar-type hemorrhage in patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysm on the internal carotid artery undergoing treatment with stents or flow diverters. Delayed remote ICH should be considered as a potential risk of using a Wingspan stent covering the carotid siphon for ICAS.

Develop multidisciplinary and international consensus on patient, disease, procedural, and perioperative factors, as well as key outcome measures and complications, to be reported for pediatric airway reconstruction studies.
Standard Delphi methods were applied. Participants proposed items in three categories: 1) patient/disease characteristics, 2) procedural/intraoperative/perioperative factors, and 3) outcome measures and complications. Both general and anatomic site-specific measures were elicited. Participants also suggested specific operations to be encompassed by this project. We then used iterative ranking and review to develop consensus lists via a priori Delphi consensus criteria.
Thirty-three pediatric airway experts from eight countries in North and South America, Europe, and Australia participated, representing otolaryngology (including International Pediatric Otolaryngology Group members), pulmonology, general surgery, and cardiothoracic surgery. Consensus led to inclusion of 19 operations comprising open expansion, resection, and slide procedures of the larynx, trachea, and bronchi as well as three endoscopic procedures. Consensus was achieved on multiple patient/comorbidity (10), disease/stenosis (7), perioperative-/intraoperative-/procedure-related (16) factors. Consensus was reached on multiple outcome and complication measures, both general and site-specific (8 general, 13 supraglottic, 15 glottic, 17 subglottic, 8 cervical tracheal, 12 thoracic tracheal). The group was able to clarify how each outcome should be measured, with specific instruments defined where applicable.
This consensus statement provides a framework to communicate results consistently and reproducibly, facilitating meta-analyses, quality improvement, transfer of information, and surgeon self-assessment. It also clarifies expert opinion on which patient, disease, procedural, and outcome measures may be important to consider in any pediatric airway reconstruction patient.
5 Laryngoscope, 129:244-255, 2019.

The Inter-Society Consensus for the Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease (TASC) guidelines were last updated in 2007 (TASC II) and represented the collaboration of international vascular specialties involved in the management of patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Since the publication of TASC II, there have been innovations in endovascular revascularization strategies for patients with PAD. The intent of this publication is to provide a complete anatomic lower limb TASC lesion classification, including the infrapopliteal segment, and an updated literature review of new endovascular techniques and practice patterns employed by vascular specialists today.

The Inter-Society Consensus for the Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease (TASC) guidelines were last updated in 2007 (TASC II) and represented the collaboration of international vascular specialties involved in the management of patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Since the publication of TASC II, there have been innovations in endovascular revascularization strategies for patients with PAD. The intent of this publication is to provide a complete anatomic lower limb TASC lesion classification, including the infrapopliteal segment, and an updated literature review of new endovascular techniques and practice patterns employed by vascular specialists today.

The Inter-Society Consensus for the Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease (TASC) guidelines were last updated in 2007 (TASC II) and represented the collaboration of international vascular specialties involved in the management of patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Since the publication of TASC II, there have been innovations in endovascular revascularization strategies for patients with PAD. The intent of this publication is to provide a complete anatomic lower limb TASC lesion classification, including the infrapopliteal segment, and an updated literature review of new endovascular techniques and practice patterns employed by vascular specialists today.

The Inter-Society Consensus for the Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease (TASC) guidelines were last updated in 2007 (TASC II) and represented the collaboration of international vascular specialties involved in the management of patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Since the publication of TASC II, there have been innovations in endovascular revascularization strategies for patients with PAD. The intent of this publication is to provide a complete anatomic lower limb TASC lesion classification, including the infrapopliteal segment, and an updated literature review of new endovascular techniques and practice patterns employed by vascular specialists today.

Lumbar stenosis is one of the more common radiographic manifestations of the aging process, leading to narrowing of the spinal canal and foramen. When stenosis is clinically relevant, patients often describe activity-related low-back or lower-extremity pain, known as neurogenic claudication. For those patients who do not improve with conservative care, surgery is considered an appropriate treatment alternative. The primary objective of surgery is to reconstitute the spinal canal. The role of fusion, in the absence of a degenerative deformity, is uncertain. The previous guideline recommended against the inclusion of lumbar fusion in the absence of spinal instability or a likelihood of iatrogenic instability. Since the publication of the original guidelines, numerous studies have demonstrated the role of surgical decompression in this patient population; however, few have investigated the utility of fusion in patients without underlying instability. The majority of studies contain a heterogeneous cohort of subjects, often combining patients with and without spondylolisthesis who received various surgical interventions, limiting fusions to those patients with instability. It is difficult if not impossible, therefore, to formulate valid conclusions regarding the utility of fusion for patients with uncomplicated stenosis. Lower-level evidence exists, however, that does not demonstrate an added benefit of fusion for these patients; therefore, in the absence of deformity or instability, the inclusion of a fusion is not recommended.

Patients presenting with stenosis associated with a spondylolisthesis will often describe signs and symptoms consistent with neurogenic claudication, radiculopathy, and/or low-back pain. The primary objective of surgery, when deemed appropriate, is to decompress the neural elements. As a result of the decompression, the inherent instability associated with the spondylolisthesis may progress and lead to further misalignment that results in pain or recurrence of neurological complaints. Under these circumstances, lumbar fusion is considered appropriate to stabilize the spine and prevent delayed deterioration. Since publication of the original guidelines there have been a significant number of studies published that continue to support the utility of lumbar fusion for patients presenting with stenosis and spondylolisthesis. Several recently published trials, including the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial, are among the largest prospective randomized investigations of this issue. Despite limitations of study design or execution, these trials have consistently demonstrated superior outcomes when patients undergo surgery, with the majority undergoing some type of lumbar fusion procedure. There is insufficient evidence, however, to recommend a standard approach to achieve a solid arthrodesis. When formulating the most appropriate surgical strategy, it is recommended that an individualized approach be adopted, one that takes into consideration the patient\'s unique anatomical constraints and desires, as well as surgeon\'s experience.