BACKGROUND: The use of undecalcified and unstained samples for articular cartilage's study (as Authors suggest) will enable to better preserve its three-dimensional structure. Feasibility of such approach will reduce time and complexity when analyzing a great number of specimens.OBJECTIVE: To test the possibility of studying articular cartilage morphology on the undecalcified inclusion blocks, avoiding cutting and staining thin sections.METHODS: Femoral condyles were obtained from White New Zealand rabbits and from Sardinian sheep, fixed in paraformaldehyde, dehydrated in ethyl alcohol, and embedded into poly-methylmethacrylate. Blocks were cut and ground,sputter-coated with gold-palladium and analyzed by a Jeol JSM 6310 electron microscope, operated between 20 and 25 kV. Data from secondary emission scanning electron microscopy were combined with data from back scattered electron microscopy (BSEM), performed sequentially over the same area.RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: In the rabbit, it was easy to discern the passage between uncalcified and calcified cartilage but it was difficult to highlight the small chondrocytic lacunae in zones Ⅱ and Ⅲ. The sheep proved to be more suitable for easily discerning all the zones of articular cartilage and its cellularity; BSEM excelled in defining the structure of calcified cartilage and the "tidemark" front. Large canals could be demarcated, digged through subchondral bone and calcified cartilage, topped by non-calcified cartilage. The results suggested that the possibility of describing articular cartilage morphology on undecalcified and unstained embedding blocks, by avoiding the cutting of thin sections, was illustrated. This provides an obvious advantage in terms of less time needed and tess complexity required in comparison with classical histomorphology. It may be an opportunity when a relevant number of samples must be analyzed.

Purpose: While pump manipulation is rarely problematic in male patients with artificial urinary sphincters (AUSs), the situation may differ in female patients due to anatomical or cultural factors. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of difficulties in pump manipulation among female AUS patients, identify associated risk factors, and explore management strategies for this challenging issue. Methods: Data were collected from all female patients who underwent a robotic AUS implantation at a single academic center between 2014 and 2022. The primary endpoint was temporary difficulties, defined by at least one other short hospitalization to learn pump manipulation. Results: Out of the 88 female AUS patients included in the study, 20 experienced initial difficulties manipulating the pump, accounting for 22.7% of the group. Temporary difficulties were reported by 16 patients (18.2%), while 4 patients (4.5%) had their devices permanently deactivated. Surgical reoperations to reposition the pump were necessary for 5 patients, representing 5.6% of the sample. The only variables significantly associated with temporary difficulties were longer operative time (183.4 minutes vs. 159.1 minutes, P=0.04) and the overall experience of the center (32 vs. 50, P=0.04). The sole variable significantly linked to serious difficulties was the overall experience of the center (11 vs. 47, P=0.004). Although the median age and body mass index were higher in the group with temporary difficulties, these differences were not statistically significant. Conclusions Difficulties in manipulating the pump are relatively common among female AUS patients. Most of these difficulties can be resolved through repeated patient education and careful follow-up. However, some may lead to serious complications. Raising awareness of this issue, along with ongoing patient education and meticulous follow-up, may help to minimize these consequences.

Purpose: While pump manipulation is rarely problematic in male patients with artificial urinary sphincters (AUSs), the situation may differ in female patients due to anatomical or cultural factors. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of difficulties in pump manipulation among female AUS patients, identify associated risk factors, and explore management strategies for this challenging issue. Methods: Data were collected from all female patients who underwent a robotic AUS implantation at a single academic center between 2014 and 2022. The primary endpoint was temporary difficulties, defined by at least one other short hospitalization to learn pump manipulation. Results: Out of the 88 female AUS patients included in the study, 20 experienced initial difficulties manipulating the pump, accounting for 22.7% of the group. Temporary difficulties were reported by 16 patients (18.2%), while 4 patients (4.5%) had their devices permanently deactivated. Surgical reoperations to reposition the pump were necessary for 5 patients, representing 5.6% of the sample. The only variables significantly associated with temporary difficulties were longer operative time (183.4 minutes vs. 159.1 minutes, P=0.04) and the overall experience of the center (32 vs. 50, P=0.04). The sole variable significantly linked to serious difficulties was the overall experience of the center (11 vs. 47, P=0.004). Although the median age and body mass index were higher in the group with temporary difficulties, these differences were not statistically significant. Conclusions Difficulties in manipulating the pump are relatively common among female AUS patients. Most of these difficulties can be resolved through repeated patient education and careful follow-up. However, some may lead to serious complications. Raising awareness of this issue, along with ongoing patient education and meticulous follow-up, may help to minimize these consequences.

Purpose: While pump manipulation is rarely problematic in male patients with artificial urinary sphincters (AUSs), the situation may differ in female patients due to anatomical or cultural factors. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of difficulties in pump manipulation among female AUS patients, identify associated risk factors, and explore management strategies for this challenging issue. Methods: Data were collected from all female patients who underwent a robotic AUS implantation at a single academic center between 2014 and 2022. The primary endpoint was temporary difficulties, defined by at least one other short hospitalization to learn pump manipulation. Results: Out of the 88 female AUS patients included in the study, 20 experienced initial difficulties manipulating the pump, accounting for 22.7% of the group. Temporary difficulties were reported by 16 patients (18.2%), while 4 patients (4.5%) had their devices permanently deactivated. Surgical reoperations to reposition the pump were necessary for 5 patients, representing 5.6% of the sample. The only variables significantly associated with temporary difficulties were longer operative time (183.4 minutes vs. 159.1 minutes, P=0.04) and the overall experience of the center (32 vs. 50, P=0.04). The sole variable significantly linked to serious difficulties was the overall experience of the center (11 vs. 47, P=0.004). Although the median age and body mass index were higher in the group with temporary difficulties, these differences were not statistically significant. Conclusions Difficulties in manipulating the pump are relatively common among female AUS patients. Most of these difficulties can be resolved through repeated patient education and careful follow-up. However, some may lead to serious complications. Raising awareness of this issue, along with ongoing patient education and meticulous follow-up, may help to minimize these consequences.