RESUMO
Increasing rates of gonococcal (GC) infection and antimicrobial resistant (AMR) GC, are a serious public health concern for Canada and around the world. Previously recommended treatments are ineffective against many of the gonorrhea strains circulating today. The current recommendation for combination therapy is now being threatened by globally emerging and increasingly resistant strains. It is important that coordinated efforts be made now to ensure these new global strains do not become established in Canada. Otherwise, we will be faced with the possibility of persistent GC infection which can lead to pelvic inflammatory disease, infertility and chronic pelvic pain in women; and epididymitis in men. The presence of GC can also increase the risk of HIV acquisition and transmission. There are a number of reasons why we are facing this public health threat. GC infection is often asymptomatic and it is highly transmissible. People may hesitate to seek testing (or to offer testing). Treatment is complex: recommendations vary by site of infection and risk of resistance. Sexual contact during travel is an important source of imported emerging resistant global strains. The new screening and diagnostic Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (NAAT) is excellent but has decreased the number of cultures being done and therefore our capacity to track AMR-GC. There are four key actions that clinicians and front-line public health professionals can take to stem the increase in rates of GC and drug resistant GC. First, normalize and increase GC screening based on risk factors and emphasize the need for safer sex practices. NAAT is useful for screening, but culture is still needed for extra-genital sites. Second, conduct pretravel counselling and include a travel history as part of the risk assessment. Third, use culture along with NAAT to establish the diagnosis and follow up for test-of-cure. Finally, refer to the most current Canadian Guidelines on Sexually Transmitted Infections or provincial/territorial recommendations on combination therapies for patients and their contacts as recommendations may have changed in response to evolving AMR-GC trends.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Study of prognosis of duodenal endocrine tumors. METHODOLOGY: Retrospective study concerned 55 duodenal endocrine tumors discovered in biopsy or surgical specimens. Follow-up records available for 49 patients indicated that inconspicuous associated clinical manifestations were often found subsequently. Seven patients were classified as Zollinger-Ellison syndrome and seven as multiple endocrine neoplasia (6 MEN I and 1 MEN II). RESULTS: Tumors were small (mean 1.28cm) and located preferentially in the first and second part of the duodenum. Fifty-four were well-differentiated and one poorly differentiated. Immunochemistry revealed 30 G-cell tumors (54.6%), 15 D-cell (27.3%), two plurihormonal (EC cell and G cell), and one GRH-cell, whereas seven could not be classified. Fifteen patients died (five in relation to their disease). Twenty-one had metastases (liver, nodes, lung), eight of whom are still alive. CONCLUSIONS: Eighty-eight percent of duodenal endocrine tumors were gastrinomas, small plurifocal tumors and somatostatinomas preferentially located in the ampullar region and diagnosed because of hematemesis or icterus. Size is an important prognostic factor in determining whether surgery is required. The prognosis is better for D- and G-cell tumors than pancreatic endocrine tumors. Duodenal endocrine tumors in multiple endocrine neoplasia have a good prognosis, but can be associated with pancreatic plurihormonal tumors and metastases.