Tag Archive for: #BJUI

Posts

Article of the week: Ultrasound guidance can be used safely for renal tract dilatation during percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Every week, the Editor-in-Chief selects an Article of the Week from the current issue of BJUI. The abstract is reproduced below and you can click on the button to read the full article, which is freely available to all readers for at least 30 days from the time of this post.

In addition to the article itself, there is an editorial written by a prominent member of the urological community and a visual abstract prepared by a trainee urologist; we invite you to use the comment tools at the bottom of each post to join the conversation. 

If you only have time to read one article this week, we recommend this one. 

Ultrasound guidance can be used safely for renal tract dilatation during percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Manuel Armas-Phan*, David T. Tzou*, David B. Bayne*, Scott V. Wiener*, Marshall L. Stoller* and Thomas Chi*

*Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, CA and Division of Urology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA

Abstract

Objectives

To compare clinical outcomes in patients who underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) with renal tract dilatation performed under fluoroscopic guidance vs renal tract dilatation with ultrasound guidance.

Patients and Methods

We conducted a prospective observational cohort study, enrolling successive patients undergoing PCNL between July 2015 and March 2018. Included in this retrospective analysis were cases where the renal puncture was successfully obtained with ultrasound guidance. Cases were then grouped according to whether fluoroscopy was used to guide renal tract dilatation or not. All statistical analyses were performed using Stata version 15.1 including univariate (Fisher’s exact test, Welch’s t‐test) and multivariate analyses (binomial logistic regression, ordinal logistic regression, and linear regression).

Results

A total of 176 patients underwent PCNL with successful ultrasonography‐guided renal puncture, of whom 38 and 138 underwent renal tract dilatation with fluoroscopic vs ultrasound guidance, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in patient age, gender, body mass index (BMI), preoperative hydronephrosis, stone burden, procedure laterality, number of dilated tracts, and calyceal puncture location between the two groups. Among ultrasound tract dilatations, a higher proportion of patients were placed in the modified dorsal lithotomy position as opposed to prone, and a significantly shorter operating time was observed. Only modified dorsal lithotomy position remained statistically significant after multivariate regression. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative stone clearance, complication rate, or intra‐operative estimated blood loss. A 5‐unit increase in a patient’s BMI was associated with 30% greater odds of increasingly severe Clavien–Dindo complications. A 5‐mm decrease in the preoperative stone burden was associated with 20% greater odds of stone‐free status. No variables predicted estimated blood loss with statistical significance.

Conclusions

Renal tract dilatation can be safely performed in the absence of fluoroscopic guidance. Compared to using fluoroscopy, the present study demonstrated that ultrasonography‐guided dilatations can be safely performed without higher complication or bleeding rates. This can be done using a variety of surgical positions, and future studies centred on improving dilatation techniques could be of impactful clinical value.

Editorial: Zero‐radiation stone treatment

In this month’s BJUI, Armas‐Phan et al. [1] report on a prospective observational trial of fluoroscopic vs ultrasound (US)‐guided tract dilatation during percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). A total of 176 patients underwent successful initial US‐only guided puncture; of these patients, 138 had US‐only dilatation, while in 38 fluoroscopy was required. The authors found no difference in patient factors (e.g. age, gender, body mass index [BMI]) or stone factors (hydronephrosis, stone burden, number of tracts or puncture location). On multivariate analysis, US dilatation was more likely to be performed in the modified dorsal lithotomy position (compared to prone), but there was no significant difference in important outcomes such as stone clearance, complication rates or blood loss.

Whilst only reporting on access (and not necessarily dilatation), the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society PCNL Global Study shows us that worldwide fluoroscopic access is by far the most common (88.3% of cases) [2] and there are relatively few reports of US‐guided dilatation in the literature. The technique does produce technical challenges as the surgeon needs to confidently identify the depth of the dilators or balloon and be sure of its location relative to calyceal anatomy. Whilst dilating short is not usually a problem as simply re‐dilating can be done, dilating too far carries serious risk of perforation of the pelvicalyceal system and vascular injury. The authors’ described technique does rely on good kidney and guidewire visualisation, and if this is not possible then fluoroscopy is used instead. Thus, even in this series with experts at this technique, 38 (22%) underwent fluoroscopic dilatation after US‐guided puncture, and of the 138 with intended US dilatation, seven (5%) were converted to fluoroscopy. Furthermore, 115 patients never entered this series as they underwent initial fluoroscopic‐guided puncture. Thus, it is important to realise that this is a series of select patients being treated by expert enthusiasts of this technique and fluoroscopy should be available in the operating theatre, as it is not possible to do this technique for all patients. In particular, obesity limits the visualisation under US and the authors have previously shown that renal access drops from 76.9% of normal‐weight patients (BMI <25 kg/m2) to 45.6% for those classified as obese (BMI >30 kg/m2) [3]. An alternative strategy to avoid radiation is to use endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery (ECIRS), as the depth of dilatation can be monitored by direct visualisation via the flexible ureteroscope.

Patients and healthcare professionals are increasingly aware of the risks posed by ionising radiation. Ferrandino et al. [4] analysed radiation exposure of patients presenting with acute stone episodes in an American setting. The mean dose was a staggering 29.7 mSv and 20% of patients received >50 mSV. There is also awareness of risk to the operating staff from endourological procedures and although doses are relatively low [5], these can accumulate during a lifetime of operating, with risks of not only malignancy but also cataract formation [6]. Whilst I am sure we all wear protective lead gowns in the operating theatre, how many people wear lead glasses? A recent study showed that, at typical workload, the annual dose to the lens of the eye was 29 mSv in interventional endourology [7].

As urologists, we should all be aware of these risks and follow the ALARA (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) principals of keeping doses to a minimum. Thus, this paper [1] is particularly welcome and shows zero‐radiation procedures can be safely performed. The authors now attempt this technique for all PCNL procedures and achieve US‐only puncture and dilatation in over half of their patients. Hopefully, this paper will inspire us all to look at reducing or eliminating radiation usage in our stone procedures and this will be good for patients and surgeons alike.

by Matt Bultitude

 

References

  1. Armas‐Phan MTzou DTBayne DB et al. Ultrasound guidance can be used safely for renal tract dilatation during percutaneous nephrolithotomy. BJUI 2019; 125: 284-91
  2. De La Rosette JAssimos DDesai M et al. The Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Global Study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 5803 patients. J Endourol 20112511– 7
  3. Usawachintachit MMasic SChang HAllen IChi TUltrasound guidance to assist percutaneous nephrolithotomy reduces radiation exposure in obese patients. Urology 20169832– 8
  4. Ferrandino MNBagrodia APierre SA et al. Radiation exposure in the acute and short‐term management of urolithiasis at 2 academic centers. J Urol 2009181668– 72
  5. Galonnier FTraxer ORosec M et al. Surgical staff radiation protection during fluoroscopy‐guided urologic interventions. J Endourol 201630638– 43
  6. Hartmann JDistler FBaumuller M et al. Risk of radiation‐induced cataracts: investigation of radiation exposure to the eye lens during endourologic procedures. J Endourol 201832897– 903
  7. Hristova‐Popova JZagorska ASaltirov I et al. Risk of radiation exposure to medical staff involved in interventional endourology. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2015165268– 71

 

 

Visual abstract: Ultrasound guidance can be used safely for renal tract dilatation during percutaneous nephrolithotomy

 

See more infographics

 

 

What’s the diagnosis?

Images from Chen et al, BJUI 2019 who are assessing pelvic anatomy and outcomes from robotic prostatectomy.

No such quiz/survey/poll

February 2020 – about the cover

One of the authors of February’s Article of the Month (Understanding volume–outcome relationships in nephrectomy and cystectomy for cancer: evidence from the UK Getting it Right First Time programme) is from Wakefield in Yorkshire, UK.

The cover image shows the moat and ruins of Sandal Castle, which is located in Sandal Magna on the outskirts of Wakefield. The castle was originally built of timber by the 2nd Earl of Surrey, William Warenne, early in the 12th century. In the 13th century, the timber motte-and-bailey castle was rebuilt in stone by a later member of the Warenne family. The castle was maintained until the late 14oos, with the Battle of Wakefield taking place nearby, and a brief resurgence whilst in Royalist hands during the English civil war, but eventually the stone was taken for use in local buildings leaving the ruin you can see today.

There is a good view of the cathedral town of Wakefield, situated on the River Calder, from the hill at Sandal Castle.

 

 

 

 

Article of the week: A randomized trial comparing bipolar TUVP with GreenLight laser PVP for treatment of small to moderate benign prostatic obstruction

Every week, the Editor-in-Chief selects an Article of the Week from the current issue of BJUI. The abstract is reproduced below and you can click on the button to read the full article, which is freely available to all readers for at least 30 days from the time of this post.

In addition to the article itself, there is an editorial written by a prominent member of the urological community and a podcast prepared by one of our Resident podcasters; we invite you to use the comment tools at the bottom of each post to join the conversation. 

If you only have time to read one article this week, we recommend this one. 

A randomized trial comparing bipolar transurethral vaporization of the prostate with GreenLight laser (xps‐180watt) photoselective vaporization of the prostate for treatment of small to moderate benign prostatic obstruction: outcomes after 2 years 

Fady K. Ghobrial, Ahmed Shoma, Ahmed M. Elshal, Mahmoud Laymon, Nasr El-Tabey, Adel Nabeeh and Ahmed A. Shokeir

Urology Department, Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt

Read the full article

Abstract

Objective

To test the non‐inferiority of bipolar transurethral vaporization of the prostate (TUVP) compared to GreenLight laser (GL) photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) for reduction of benign prostatic hyperplasia‐related lower urinary tract symptoms in a randomized trial.

Methods

Eligible patients with prostate volumes of 30–80 mL were randomly allocated to GL‐PVP (n = 58) or bipolar TUVP (n = 61). Non‐inferiority of symptom score (International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS]) at 24 months was evaluated. All peri‐operative variables were recorded and compared. Urinary (IPSS, maximum urinary flow rate and post‐void residual urine volume) and sexual (International Index of Erectile Function‐15) outcome measures were evaluated at 1, 4, 12 and 24 months. Need for retreatment and complications, change in PSA level and health resources‐related costs of both procedures were recorded and compared.

Results

Baseline and peri‐operative variables were similar in the two groups. At 1, 4, 12 and 24 months, 117, 116, 99 and 96 patients, respectively, were evaluable. Regarding urinary outcome measures, there was no significant difference between the groups. The mean ± sd IPSS at 1 and 2 years was 7.1 ± 3 and 7.9 ± 2.9 (P = 0.8), respectively, after GL‐PVP and 6.3 ± 3.1 and 7.2 ± 2.8, respectively, after bipolar TUVP (P = 0.31). At 24 months, the mean difference in IPSS was 0.7 (95% confidence interval −0.6 to 2.3; P = 0.6). The median (range) postoperative PSA reduction was 64.7 (25–99)% and 65.9 (50–99)% (P = 0.006) after GL‐PVP, and 32.1 (28.6–89.7)% and 39.3 (68.8–90.5)% (P = 0.005) after bipolar TUVP, at 1 and 2 years, respectively. After 2 years, retreatment for recurrent bladder outlet obstruction was reported in eight (13.8%) and 10 (16.4%) patients in the GL‐PVP and bipolar TUVP groups, respectively (P = 0.8). The mean estimated cost per bipolar TUVP procedure was significantly lower than per GL‐PVP procedure after 24 months (P = 0.01).

Conclusions

In terms of symptom control, bipolar TUVP was not inferior to GL‐PVP at 2 years. Durability of the outcome needs to be tracked. The greater cost of GL‐PVP compared with bipolar TUVP is an important concern.

Read more Articles of the week
Image courtesy of BJUI Knowledge

Editorial: Vaporization is vaporization, but not at any cost…

The paper by Ghobrial et al. [1] confirms that bipolar electrocautery vaporization is more cost‐effective than GreenLight Laser vaporization, as the two techniques are equally effective but GreenLight vaporization is more costly in the smaller prostates being studied.

Underpinning the analysis was a well‐conducted randomized controlled trial, showing equivalent peri‐operative and postoperative measures with the two procedures and no difference in the primary endpoint of IPSS reduction at 2 years. The two techniques were performed in a similar manner and were equally efficient and safe as expected.

Philosophically, the clinical results are both unsurprising and expected, and confirm the long‐held belief that the energy source employed for vaporization and, for that matter, enucleation, is of secondary concern compared to the skill and dedication of the operator. The technique in either case should result in comparable efficacy, leaving cost‐effectiveness to be an important way to help both urologists and administrators discriminate between them.

Although the costs are not necessarily going to be comparable with those in other jurisdictions, this will apply equally to both treatments and this study therefore represents an excellent attempt to cost both procedures, removing equivalent costs. Importantly, this assessment included the costs of both readmissions and interventions over the full 24‐month period. This captures the bulk of the important complications after these types of procedures and adds to the validity of the findings.

The big difference between the costs of the two treatments being studied is, of course, ‘capital equipment including maintenance’. The single‐use fibre model rather than the cost of the machine has been the mainstay for the profitability of laser companies since the inception of laser prostatectomy. The maintenance contract has been a further cost, which is always underestimated. Reusability of the laser fibres is one way of diminishing per‐procedure costs, but is only consistently possible for Holmium end‐fire fibres [2]. The fact that the authors estimate of these costs was a ‘case share in 5‐year budget plan’ also suggests that the true cost of the use of the GreenLight laser is underestimated.

With the burgeoning number of new techniques and technologies for the treatment of BPH emerging, and new treatment paradigms being proposed, let alone the increasingly negative focus on medical waste [3] and the increasing use of single‐use disposable handpieces/tubing/drapes/fibres, articles such as this are timely. A standardized methodology for assessing the cost‐effectiveness of treatments for BPH is needed and should be an essential part of pivotal studies and therefore the regulatory approval processes.

by Peter Gilling

 

References

  1. Ghobrial FKShoma AElshal AM et al. A randomized trial comparing bipolar transurethral vaporization of the prostate with GreenLight laser (xps‐180watt) photoselective vaporization of the prostate for treatment of small to moderate benign prostatic obstruction: outcomes after 2 years. BJU Int2020124144– 52
  2. Fraundorfer MRGilling PJKennett KMDunton NGHolmium laser resection of the prostate is more cost effective than transurethral resection of the prostate: results of a randomized prospective study. Urology 200157454– 8
  3. Rose EDModlin DMCiampa MLMangieri CWFaler BJBandera BCEvaluation of operative waste in a military medical center: analysis of operating room cost and waste during surgical cases. Am Surg. 201985717– 20

 

Residents’ podcast: A randomized trial comparing bipolar TUVP with GreenLight laser PVP for treatment of small to moderate benign prostatic obstruction: outcomes after 2 years

Maria Uloko is a Urology Resident at the University of Minnesota Hospital.

A randomized trial comparing bipolar transurethral vaporization of the prostate with GreenLight laser (xps‐180watt) photoselective vaporization of the prostate for treatment of small to moderate benign prostatic obstruction: outcomes after 2 years

Read the full article

Abstract

Objective

To test the non‐inferiority of bipolar transurethral vaporization of the prostate (TUVP) compared to GreenLight laser (GL) photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) for reduction of benign prostatic hyperplasia‐related lower urinary tract symptoms in a randomized trial.

Methods

Eligible patients with prostate volumes of 30–80 mL were randomly allocated to GL‐PVP (n = 58) or bipolar TUVP (n = 61). Non‐inferiority of symptom score (International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS]) at 24 months was evaluated. All peri‐operative variables were recorded and compared. Urinary (IPSS, maximum urinary flow rate and post‐void residual urine volume) and sexual (International Index of Erectile Function‐15) outcome measures were evaluated at 1, 4, 12 and 24 months. Need for retreatment and complications, change in PSA level and health resources‐related costs of both procedures were recorded and compared.

Results

Baseline and peri‐operative variables were similar in the two groups. At 1, 4, 12 and 24 months, 117, 116, 99 and 96 patients, respectively, were evaluable. Regarding urinary outcome measures, there was no significant difference between the groups. The mean ± sd IPSS at 1 and 2 years was 7.1 ± 3 and 7.9 ± 2.9 (P = 0.8), respectively, after GL‐PVP and 6.3 ± 3.1 and 7.2 ± 2.8, respectively, after bipolar TUVP (P = 0.31). At 24 months, the mean difference in IPSS was 0.7 (95% confidence interval −0.6 to 2.3; P = 0.6). The median (range) postoperative PSA reduction was 64.7 (25–99)% and 65.9 (50–99)% (P = 0.006) after GL‐PVP, and 32.1 (28.6–89.7)% and 39.3 (68.8–90.5)% (P = 0.005) after bipolar TUVP, at 1 and 2 years, respectively. After 2 years, retreatment for recurrent bladder outlet obstruction was reported in eight (13.8%) and 10 (16.4%) patients in the GL‐PVP and bipolar TUVP groups, respectively (P = 0.8). The mean estimated cost per bipolar TUVP procedure was significantly lower than per GL‐PVP procedure after 24 months (P = 0.01).

Conclusions

In terms of symptom control, bipolar TUVP was not inferior to GL‐PVP at 2 years. Durability of the outcome needs to be tracked. The greater cost of GL‐PVP compared with bipolar TUVP is an important concern.

 
More podcasts

BJUI Podcasts are available on iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/bju-international/id1309570262

 

 

2019 Reviewers

Thank you to our 2019 Reviewers

We would particularly like to thank the following individuals who are the top reviewers for the journal in 2019, all with >10 reviews:

 

Andrew Elders Alexander Cole
Nathan Lawrentschuk Kelly Stratton
Janet Baack Kukreja Stacy Loeb
Robert H. Thompson Hashim Ahmed

 

We are extremely grateful to all our reviewers for their time and hard work

Aastha Abboudi, Hamid Abdollah, Firas Abern, Michael
Abufaraj, Mohammad Adam, Andy Adolfsson, Jan Adshead, James
Ahlawat, Rajesh Ahmed, Aamir Ahmed, Kamran Aho, Tev
Al Jaafari, Feras Albersen, Maarten Albertsen, Peter Albuquerque, Emanuel
Ambrosio, Maria Amoroso, Peter Amparore, Daniele Anastasiadis, Anastasios
Anderson, Paul Andersson, Karl-Erik Andriole, Gerald Anele, Uzoma
Antonelli, Jodi Apostolidis, Apostolos Arora, Sohrab Asplin, John
AUDENET, François Auvinen, Anssi Aydin, Abdullatif Baard, Joyce
Bachmann, Lucas Ball, Mark Barber, Neil Barod, Ravi
Basak, Ram Becerra, Maria F. Beckmann, Kerri Bedke, Jens
Beiles, Charles Barry Berger, Lorenz Bertolo, Riccardo Beyer, Burkhard
Beyer, Katharina Bhandari, Mahendra Bianchi, Lorenzo Bishop, Conrad
Bivalacqua, Trinity Blaivas, Jerry Blecher, Gideon Blok, Bertil
Blute, Michael Bodie, Joshua Bogaert, Guy Bokhorst, Leonard
Bolgeri, Marco Bolton, Damien Boorjian, Stephen Borofsky, Michael S.
Borza, Tudor Bouchier-Hayes, David Bowers, Aaron BOZKURT, Ibrahim
Braga, Luis Bratt, Ola Bravi, Carlo Andrea Breau, Rodney
Brembilla, Giorgio Breyer, Benjamin Brown, Christian Brown, Matthew
Buckley, Jill Budäus, Lars Bujons, Anna Bultitude, Matthew
Burger, Maximilian Buscarini, Maurizio Cahill, Declan Calvert, Robert
Campi, Riccardo Canales, Benjamin K. Canda, Abdullah Cantiello, Francesco
Capece, Marco Capogrosso, Paolo Carillo, Mauro CARLO, BUONERBA
Castellani, Daniele Castiglione, Fabio Cathcart, Paul Cayan, Selahittin
Celia, Antonio Celik, Serdar Cellek, Selim Challacombe, Ben
Chandak, Pankaj Chandra, Ashish Chandrasekar, Thenappan Chang, Peter
Chapin, Brian Chapple, Christopher Chartier-Kastler, Emmanuel Checcucci, Enrico
Chee, Justin Chemasle, Christophe Chen, Jian Chen, Qi
Chen, Ronald Chew, Ben Chi, Thomas Chin, Joseph
Chin, Peter Chiong, Edmund Chiriaco, Giovanni Cho, Kang Su
Cho, Min Chul Choi, Haesun Choi, Seungtaek Choong, Simon
Christopher, Andrew Chudek, Jerzy Chung, Jinsoo Clark, Peter
Cocci, Andrea Collins, Justin Connell, Shea Connolly, Stephen
Cook, Gary Costello, Anthony Cranston, David Crawford, David
Cresswell, Joanne Crestani, Alessandro Cruz, Célia Cruz, Francisco
Culig, Zoran Cumberbatch, Marcus Cutress, Mark Dahm, Philipp
Dall’Era, Marc Damber, Jan-Erik Dangle, Pankaj Danilack, V. A.
Danuser, Hansjoerg Das, Akhil DasGupta, Ranan Davis, John
Davis, Niall de Castro Abreu, Andre Luis De La Rosette, Jean De Luca, Stefano
De Nunzio, Cosimo Del Popolo, Giulio Delahunt, Brett Dell’Oglio, Paolo
Denstedt, John Desai, Janak Desai, Mahesh Deshpande, Aniruddh
Di Muzio, Nadia Ding, Maylynn Dinkelman-Smit, M. Dizman, Nazli
Djordjevic, Miroslav Dmochowski, Roger Downing, Amy Dragos, Laurian
Dudderidge, Tim Dukic, Ivo Dundee, Philip Eardley, Ian
Eberli, Daniel Eden, Christopher Efstathiou, Jason Ehdaie, Behfar
Eisner, Brian El-Ghoneimi, Alaa Elhage, Oussama Elliott, Sean
Elshal, Ahmed Elsheikh, Mohamed Elterman, Dean Emberton, Mark
Emiliani, Esteban Engeler, Daniel Enting, Deborah Epstein, Jonathan
Erci, Behice Everaert, Karel Everaerts, Wouter Fajkovic, Harun
Falagario, Ugo Farhat, Walid Ferriero, MariaConsiglia Ferro, Matteo
Ficarra, Vincenzo Figg, William Filson, Christopher Finch, William
Fiorini, Paolo Fisch, Margit Fisher, Rebecca Fishman, Mayer
Fleshner, Neil Fletcher, Sean Fok, Cynthia Fong, Eva
Foo, Keong Tatt Foreman, Darren Fraundorfer, Mark Friberg, Anne Sofie
Froehner, Michael Frydenberg, Mark Gacci, Mauro Gadzhiev, Nariman
Gakis, Georgios Galfano, Antonio Ghagane, Shridhar C. Ghani, Khurshid
Ghose, Amit Giannantoni, Antonella Giannarini, Gianluca Giganti, Francesco
Gild, Philipp Gill, Inderbir Gilling, Peter Giusti, Guido
Gokce, Mehmet Ilker Goldfarb, David Goldman, Howard Gontero, Paulo
Goossen, Hans Gordon, Stephen Gore, John Gorin, Michael
Graefen, Markus Gray, Elin Greenwell, Tamsin Gregg, Justin
Grey, Alistair Grey, Benjamin Gross, Andreas Gross, Martin
Grummet, Jeremy Gu, Meng Gulati, Roman Gundeti, Mohan
Gupta, Mohit Gupta, Nikhil K. Guru, Khurshid Guruli, Georgi
Habous, Mohamad Hackett, Geoff Hadjipavlou, Marios Hahn, Andrew
Hamid, Rizwan Hamidi, Nurullah Han, Bangmin Han, Misop
Hanna, Nawar Hanno, Philip Hart, Nicolas Hasan, Mudhar
Häuser, Lorine Heesakkers, John Hegarty, Paul Heidenreich, Axel
Heller, Nick Hemal, Ashok Hennessey, Derek Herlemann, Annika
Hevia, Mateo Hindley, Richard Hsi, Ryan S. Huang, Jay
Hubscher, Charles Huddart, Robert Hughes, Francis Hughes, Simon
Hung, Andrew Hwang, Eu Chang Ilg, Marcus Ingham, Matthew
Irtan, Sabine Irving, Stuart Jack, Greg Jeldres, Claudio
Jeong, Chang Wook Jiwane, Ashish Johnson, Mark Joseph, Jean
Joshi, Pankaj Jung, Jae Hung Kadıoğlu, Ateş Kahokehr, Arman
Kalapara, Arveen Kalejaiye, Ayo Kamat, Ashish Kapoor, Jada
Karakiewicz, Pierre Karam, Jose Karunanithy, Narayan Kasivisvanathan, Veeru
Kavoussi, Louis Kaynar, Mehmet Keeley, Frank Kemal, Sarica
Khan, Azhar Khochikar, Makarand Khoubehi, Bijan Kim, Isaac
Kim, Jae Heon Kim, Simon King, Martin Kirby, Michael
Kirkman, Maggie Kirsch, Andrew Kirschner-Hermanns, Ruth Kishan, Amar
Kitta, Takeya Klaassen, Zachary Klatte, Tobias Knudsen, Bodo
Koch, Michael Kockelbergh, Roger Konety, Badrinath Koo, Kevin
Kosaka, Takeo Kowalczyk, Anna Kowalewski, Tim Krambeck, Amy
Krasnow, Ross Krauss, Daniel J. Krimphove, Marieke Kryvenko, Oleksandr
Kulkarni, Ravi Kulkarni, Sanjay Kumar, Sunil Kundu, Bibhas
Kuo, Hann-Chorng Kusaka, M. Kutlu, Omer Kwon, Ohseong
Lam, Wayne Lamb, Alastair Lamb, Benjamin Lancia, Andrea
Landman, Jaime Lane, Giulia Lange, Dirk Laniado, Marc
Larcher, Alessandro Lau, Adrian Laudone, Vincent Lavallée, Luke
Lawrenson, Ross Lee, Byron Lee, David Lee, Jason Y.
Lee, Jongsoo Lee, Won Ki Lee, Young Joon Leitner, Lorenz
Lerner, Lori Lestingi, Jean Leveridge  , Michael Levine, Larry
Li, Jianxing Li, Roger LIATSIKOS, EVANGELOS Liauw, Stanley
Lieske, John Lin, Guiting Lingeman, James Lipkin, Michael
Lipshultz, Larry Liu, Hongbin Løgager, Vibeke López, Pedro José
Lotan, Tamara Ma, Runzhuo Madersbacher, Stephan Mahal, Brandon
Majima, Tsuyoshi Makanjuola, Jonathan Malde, Sachin Mamode, Nizam
Mandel, Philipp Manecksha, Rustom Manfredi, Matteo Marchioni, Michele
Mark, Stephen Marks, Leonard Martin, Richard Martinez-Salamanca, Juan
Martini, Alberto Masson-Lecomte, Alexandra Matsuda, Tadashi Mattei, Agostino
Maurer, Tobias Mayer, Erik Mazzone, Elio Mazzucchi, Eduardo
McCammon, Kurt McClintock, Tyler McGrath, John McNeill, Alan
McNeill, S McNicholas, Thomas Mehan, Nicholas Mehnert, Ulrich
Menichetti, Julia Meyer, Christian Milenkovic, Uros Minhas, Suks
Mir, Maria Misrai, Vincent Mizokami, Atsushi Mizuno, Kentaro
Modgil, Vaibhav Modi, Parth Modonutti, Daniele Moncada, Ignacio
Monga, Manoj Montanari, Emanuele Montorsi, Francesco Moochhala, Shabbir
Moon, Daniel Moore, Caroline Moran, Diarmaid Morel Journel, Nicolas
MORETTI, KIM Morey, Allen F. Moschini, Marco Mossanen, Matthew
Mostafid, Hugh MOURMOURIS, PANAGIOTIS Mout, Lisanne Muir, Gordon
Mukhopadhyay, Subhankar Mumtaz, Faiz Mundy, Anthony Muneer, Asif
Murphy, Adam Murphy, Declan Muschter, Rolf Nabi, Junaid
Nair, Shiva Najari, Bobby Narayan, Vikram Nathan, Senthil
Nazzani, Sebastiano Netsch, Christopher Nguyen, David-Dan Nicolai, Nicola
Norberto, Bernardo Novara, Giacomo Nunes-Silva, Igor O’Brien, Timothy
Odisho, Anobel Ogden, Chris Ohlander, Samuel O’Kelly, Fardod
Olsburgh, Jonathon Onem, Kadir Osmonov, Daniar Ost, Piet
Ozyavuz, Rasin Paciotti, Marco Pais, Jr., Vernon Pais, Vernon
Pal, Sumanta Panach-Navarrete, J. Pang, See‑Tong Panicker, Jalesh
Pannek, Jürgen Pariser, Joseph Patel, Hiten Patel, Nishant
Patel, Prashant Patel, Vipul Paterson, Ryan Patterson, Jake
Paul, Asit Pavlovich, Christian Pearce, Ian Pearce, Shane
Pearle, Margaret Penson, David Peters, Kenneth Pierorazio, Phillip
Pinsky, Paul Pontari, Mike Popert, Richard Porpiglia, Francesco
Porten, Sima Porter, James Portis, Andrew Potretzke, Aaron
Preminger, Glenn Presicce, Fabrizio Preston, Mark Purohit, Rajveer
Radtke, Jan Philipp Rai, Bhavan Rais-Bahrami, Soroush Raison, Nicholas
Ralph, David Ramakrishnan, Venkat Ramani, Vijay Ramasamy, Ranjith
Ramaswamy, Ashwin Ramón de Fata, Fernando Ranasinghe, Weranja Randhawa, Karen
Rane, Abhay Rashid, Prem Rassweiler, Jens Rastinehad, Ardeshir
Ratan, Hari Reddy, Sumeet Rees, Geraint Rees, Rowland
Reese, Stephen Reiter, Robert Resorlu, Berkan Rha, Koon Ho
Rink, Michael Rivera, Marcelino Riza Kural, Ali Robert, Grégoire
Roberts, Matthew Robertson, William Robinson, David Rocco, Bernardo
Rogers, Alistair Rogers, Craig Roghmann, Florian Roobol, Monique
Rose, Brent Roseman, John Ross, Ashley Roth, Beat
Rottenberg, Giles Rukin, Nicholas Rule, Andrew Russell, Beth
Russo, Giorgio Ivan Sabnis, Ravindra Sade, Recep Sahai, Arun
Sakellariou, Christina Alexandra Salami, Simpa Salonia, Andrea Salter, Carolyn
Samaratunga, Hemamali Sammon, Jesse Samnakay, Naeem Samplaski, Mary
Sanchez-Salas, Rafael Sangster, Philippa Sarica, Kemal Sas, David
Sathianathen, Niranjan Schaeffer, Edward Schiavina, Riccardo Schmid, Marianne
Schutzer, Matthew Sedigh, Omid Segaran, Surayne Seisen, Thomas
Sellitti, Donald Semins, Michelle Sengupta, Shomik Sethia, Krishna
Sfakianos, John Shao, Yi Shaw, Greg Shigemura, Katsumi
Shiranov, Kirill Shrotri, Nitin Shukla, Aseem Silverman, Joshua
Singh, Avinash Siva, Shankar Skarecky, Douglas Skolarus, Ted
Smith, Angela Smith, Arthur Smith, Thomas Soares, Ricardo
Soderberg, Leah Sodha, Hiren Soeterik, Timo Sofer, Mario
Sofikitis, Nikolaos Sokoll, Lori Somani, Bhaskar Sonpavde, Guru
Sood, Akshay Soomro, Naeem Sooriakumaran, Prasanna Speakman, Mark
Spiess, Phillippe Spratt, Daniel Srinivasan, Arun Stai, Bethany
Stamatakis, Lambros Standring, Susan Stattin, Pär Stebbing, Justin
Stephan, Carsten Stewart, Grant Stish, Bradley Stoianovici, Dan
Stone, Nelson Stricker, Phillip Stroman, Luke Studd, Rodney
Suardi, Nazareno Subudhi, Sumit Sujenthiran, Arunan Sundi, Debasish
Sur, Roger Swann, Ray Tae, Bum Sik Tailly, Thomas
Takagi, Toshio Tan, Wei Shen Tay, Kae Jack Taylor, Claire
Te, Alexis Teichman, Joel Teoh, Jeremy Tewari, Ash
Thalmann, George Thimmegowda, Manohar Thomas, Kay Thurairaja, Ramesh
Tikkinen, Kari Tilki, Derya Torremade Barreda, Josep Tosoian, Jeffrey
Tran, Maxine Trinh, Quoc-Dien Trinh, Vincent Tsivian, Matvey
Tu, Shi-Ming Tubaro, Andrea Tully, Karl Turajlic, Samra
Turney, Ben Ukimura, Osamu Urkmez, Ahmet Uruc, Fatih
Uzzo, Robert van den Bergh, Roderick Van der Aa, Frank Van der Kwast, Theodorus
Van Hemelrijck, Mieke van Kerrebroeck, Philip van Renterghem, Koenraad van Rij, Simon
Vanni, Alex Vasdev, Nikhil Vasdev, Nikhil Vela, Ian
Verma, Hema Vernooij, Robin Vicentini, Fabio C Villers, Arnauld
Vivian, Justin Wagenlehner, Florian Wallis, Christopher Walsh, Anna
Walsh, Patrick Walton, Thomas Wang, Shaogang Wang, Ye
Ward, John Warner, Jonathan Watanabe, Hiroki Watkin, Nick
Watson, William Weight, Christopher Weizer, Alon Welk, Blayne
Westney, Ouida Weston, Robin White, Jared Williams, Michael
Williams, Stephen Willis, Susan Winkle, David Wiseman, Oliver
Withington, John Wong, Kathie Wong, Lih-Ming Woo, Henry
Woo, Sungmin Wood, Dan Woon, Dixon Teck Sing Wright, Anne
Wu, Wenqi Wyant, Cole Wysock, James Xu, Kewei
Xylinas, Evanguelos Yafi, Faysal Yang, Dong-Rong Yap, Tet
Yassaie, Omid Yaxley, John Ye, Dingwei Yoshimura, Naoki
Zamboglou, Constantinos Zamboni, Stefania Zargar, Homi Zeng, Guohua
Zhao, Lee Zhu, Gang Zhu, Xiaoye Zondervan, Patricia
Zorn, Kevin

 

 

We look forward to working with you again in 2020.

 

© 2024 BJU International. All Rights Reserved.