-
Reviews
Back to Reviews
Submited on: 27 Sep 2010 03:00:37 PM GMT
Published on: 27 Sep 2010 03:24:20 PM GMT
- Other Comments: it is an interesting article and the difference in mortality is impressive.it would be important to know that why Galia et al followed the patients for 120 days when post op mortality by defination is with in 30 days.the number of cases in Galia et al study is indeed large but i wonder whether the number of cases will increase incidence of mortality in your study.
-
Invited by the author to review this article? :
Yes -
Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
No
-
References:
None -
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
None - How to cite: Hussain S Z.Incidence Of Trans Rectal Ultra Sound Guided Prostatic Biopsy [Review of the article 'Incidence of Trans Rectal Ultra Sound Guided Prostatic Biopsy Related Mortality ' by Bluhm S].WebmedCentral 2010;1(10):WMCRW0060
as my title said, that is smart work.
i am saying that because i am uro-oncology surgeon. i do TRUS biopsy very frequent since 2005. i did thousands of cases and i don't really have any single mortality that can be attributed to the procedure. actually; i only had one case that was hypertensive and developed sreoke the second day post procedure, and, thanks for God, he is currently in good health.
i accept with you the rate of mortality should be revised. I am doing some work on my own data concerning rate of complications. i will be happy if you may like doing multi-institutional work.
i am not sure why the study of mortality specified 120 days post procedure, i find that long period, and i am not sure of the true base of that.
No
No
No
None
I am uro-oncology surgeon.