Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Urology during Afghanistan mission: lessons learned and implications for the future
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Urology during Afghanistan mission: lessons learned and implications for the future
Do you wish to request the book?
Urology during Afghanistan mission: lessons learned and implications for the future
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Urology during Afghanistan mission: lessons learned and implications for the future
2023
Overview
PurposeBattle-related trauma is common in modern warfare and can lead to genitourinary injuries. In Western countries, urogenital injuries are rare in the civilian environment. The main objective of this study was to assess urological workload for surgeons on deployment.Material and methodsData were acquired over a period of five years of deployment in a U.S. facility in Afghanistan.ResultsGerman urological surgeons treated on average one urologic outpatient per day and performed 314 surgical interventions overall. Surgical interventions were categorized as battle-related interventions (BRIs, n = 169, 53.8%) and nonbattle-related interventions (non-BRIs, n = 145, 46.2%). In the BRI group, interventions were mainly performed on the external genitalia (n = 67, 39.6%), while in the non-BRI group, endourological procedures predominated (n = 109). This is consistent with a higher rate of abdominal or pelvic procedures performed in the BRI group (n = 51, 30.2%).Furthermore, the types of interventions performed on the external genitalia differed significantly. In the BRI group, 58.2% (n = 39) of interventions were scrotal explorations, but none of those procedures were performed in the non-BRI group (p < 0.001). However, 50.0% (n = 13) of scrotal explorations in the non-BRI group were due to suspected torsions of the testes followed by orchidopexy (BRI: n = 1, 1.5%, p < 0.001). Concerning outpatients, the consultation was mainly due to complaints concerning the external genitalia (32.7%, n = 252) or kidney/ureteral stones (23.5%, n = 181).ConclusionWhile the treatment of urological outpatients in a deployment setting resembles the treatment of soldiers in Germany, BRIs requires abdominal/retroperitoneal urosurgical skills and basic skills in reconstructive surgery.
Publisher
Springer Nature B.V
Subject
