Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Mediators Inflamm ; 2019: 8971036, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31885502

RESUMO

Animal models are widely used to replicate human intra-abdominal infections. Different methodologies have been described and proposed in the scientific literature, including injection and surgical models. The aim of this review is to recapitulate the advantages and disadvantages of each method to help choose the most appropriate model for individual experimental purposes.


Assuntos
Modelos Animais de Doenças , Sepse , Animais , Humanos , Lipopolissacarídeos/toxicidade , Peritonite/patologia
2.
Cancers (Basel) ; 14(22)2022 Nov 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36428718

RESUMO

Oncoplastic level II breast-conserving surgery (OPS2) allows for wider excisions than standard breast-conserving surgery, but the literature on this technique in the treatment of DCIS is scarce. This study compares OPS2 to conservative mastectomy (CM) in patients undergoing surgery for large DCIS. The clinical, radiological, surgical, and post-operative data of 147 patients who underwent either CM or OPS2 for large DCIS between 2007 and 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. The surgical, oncological, and patient-reported outcomes (PRO) were analyzed and compared between the two groups. The surgical outcomes were similar, in terms of margin involvement (p = 0.211), complication rate (p = 0.827), and re-excision rate (p = 1). The rate of additional surgery for cosmetic optimization was significantly lower in the OPS2 group: only 1 (1.8%) patient required surgical adjustments versus 24 (26.4%) patients in the CM group (p < 0.001). The mean hospital stay was lower in the OPS2 group (p < 0.001). The oncological outcomes did not differ between the two groups (p = 0.662). The PRO analysis showed better outcomes in the OPS2 group, which achieved statistical significance in the sexual well-being module (p = 0.015). Skin sensitivity loss was also significantly lower in the OPS2 group (p < 0.001). When feasible, OPS2 should be considered in the treatment of large DCIS, as it is safe and shows high levels of patient satisfaction.

3.
Cancers (Basel) ; 14(5)2022 Mar 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35267583

RESUMO

Oncoplastic surgery level II techniques (OPSII) are used in patients with operable breast cancer. There is no evidence regarding their safety and efficacy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). The aim of this study was to compare the oncological and aesthetic outcomes of this technique compared with those observed in mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction (MIBR), in post-NAC patients undergoing surgery between January 2016 and March 2021. Local disease-free survival (L-DFS), regional disease-free survival (R-DFS), distant disease-free survival (D-DFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared; the aesthetic results and quality of life (QoL) were evaluated using BREAST-Q. A total of 297 patients were included, 87 of whom underwent OPSII and 210 of whom underwent MIBR. After a median follow-up of 39.5 months, local recurrence had occurred in 3 patients in the OPSII group (3.4%), and in 13 patients in the MIBR group (6.1%) (p = 0.408). The three-year L-DFS rates were 95.1% for OPSII and 96.2% for MIBR (p = 0.286). The three-year R-DFS rates were 100% and 96.4%, respectively (p = 0.559). The three-year D-DFS rate were 90.7% and 89.7% (p = 0.849). The three-year OS rates were 95.7% and 95% (p = 0.394). BREAST-Q highlighted significant advantages in physical well-being for OPSII. No difference was shown for satisfaction with breasts (p = 0.656) or psychosocial well-being (p = 0.444). OPSII is safe and effective after NAC. It allows oncological and aesthetic outcomes with a high QoL, and is a safe alternative for locally advanced tumors which are partial responders to NAC.

4.
Minerva Surg ; 76(6): 564-574, 2021 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34338470

RESUMO

Surgical management of breast cancer patients carrying pathogenic variants (PV) on breast cancer genes (BRCA) 1 and 2 has changed throughout the last decade due to growing availability of genetic testing, and has shifted towards the diffusion of bilateral mastectomy. Today's scenario however is in further evolution because of emerging data that suggest a personalized modulation of treatment. In this work we aimed to gather recent evidence supporting a prophylactic or conservative surgical approach in order to define the state of the art in today's treatment of BRCA carriers with breast cancer. We reviewed the literature to identify studies providing evidence on surgical treatment in breast cancer patients with BRCA 1 and 2 PVs. We included articles comparing outcomes between patients undergoing breast conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy, and articles investigating contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy (CRRM), with a particular focus on recent literature. International guidelines were also reviewed. Optimal surgical management of BRCA PV carriers with breast cancer remains controversial. While the introduction of routine genetic testing has initially led surgeons to favor more radical treatments, recent literature provides evidence that a conservative approach is safe and feasible in selected cases. Guidelines are heterogeneous and provide guidance without constraining the surgeon. Patients should undergo adequate genetic and surgical counseling in order to receive the best tailored surgical treatment. Because guidelines vary in different countries and provide no definite protocol, they highlight the importance of accurate surgical planning. Clinical, familial and psychosocial factors should be taken into account when approaching a BRCA PV carrier with breast cancer, in order to guarantee the best evidence-based patient care in an era of personalized treatment.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Neoplasias da Mama/genética , Feminino , Genes BRCA2 , Humanos , Mastectomia , Mastectomia Segmentar , Mutação
5.
J Pers Med ; 11(2)2021 Feb 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33671712

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction (IPBR) using traditional submuscular (SM) positioning of implants versus prepectoral (PP) positioning of micropolyurethane-foam-coated implants (microthane) without further coverage. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of breast cancer patients treated by nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) and IPBR in our institution during the two-year period from January 2018 to December 2019. Patients were divided into two groups based on the plane of implant placement: SM versus PP. RESULTS: 177 patients who received IPBR after NSM were included in the study; implants were positioned in a SM plane in 95 patients and in a PP plane in 82 patients. The two cohorts were similar for mean age (44 years and 47 years in the SM and PP groups, respectively) and follow-up (20 months and 16 months, respectively). The mean operative time was 70 min shorter in the PP group. No significant differences were observed in length of hospital stay or overall major complication rates. Statistically significant advantages were observed in the PP group in terms of aesthetic results, chronic pain, shoulder dysfunction, and skin sensibility (p < 0.05), as well as a trend of better outcomes for sports activity and sexual/relationship life. Cost analysis revealed that PP-IPBR was also economically advantageous over SM-IPBR. CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary experience seems to confirm that PP positioning of a polyurethane-coated implant is a safe, reliable and effective method to perform IPBR after NSM.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA