Fertility-Sparing Approach in Patients with Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer Grade 2 Stage IA (FIGO): A Qualitative Systematic Review.

Background: Endometrial cancer (EC) is one of the most common gynecologic malignancy, mostly in postmenopausal women. The gold standard treatment for EC is surgery, but in the early stages, it is possible to opt for conservative treatment. In the last decade, different clinical and pathological markers have been studied to identify women who respond to conservative treatment. A lot of immunohistochemical markers have been evaluated to predict response to progestin treatment, even if their usefulness is still unclear; the prognosis of this neoplasm depends on tumor stage, and a specific therapeutic protocol is set according to the stage of the disease. Objective: (1) To provide an overview of the conservative management of Stage 1A Grade (G) 2 endometrioid EC (FIGO) and the oncological and reproductive outcomes related; (2) to describe the molecular alterations before and after progestin therapy in patients undergoing conservative treatment. Materials and Methods: A systematic computerized search of the literature was performed in the main electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, PubMed, and Cochrane Library), from 2010 to September 2021, in order to evaluate the oncological and reproductive outcomes in patients with G2 stage IA EC who ask for fertility-sparing treatment. The expression of several immunohistochemical markers was evaluated in pretreatment phase and during the follow-up in relation to response to hormonal therapy. Only scientific publications in English were included. The risk of bias assessment was performed. Review authors' judgments were categorized as "low risk," "high risk," or "unclear risk" of bias. Results: Twelve articles were included in the study: 7 observational studies and 5 case series/reports. Eighty-four patients who took progestins (megestrol acetate, medroxyprogesterone acetate, and/or levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices) were analyzed. The publication bias analysis turned out to be "low." 54/84 patients had a complete response, 23/84 patients underwent radical surgery, and 20/84 had a relapse after conservative treatment. Twenty-two patients had a pregnancy. The length of follow-up was variable, from 6 to 142 months according to the different studies analyzed. Several clinical and pathological markers have been studied to identify women who do not respond to conservative treatment: PR and ER were the most studied predictive markers, in particular PR appeared as the most promising; MMR, SPAG9, Ki67, and Nrf2-survivin pathway provided good results with a significant association with a good response to progestin therapy. However, no reliable predictive markers are currently available to be used in clinical practice. Conclusions: The conservative treatment may be an option for patients with stage IA G2 EEC who desire to preserve their fertility. The immunohistochemical markers evaluation looks promising in predicting response to conservative treatment. Further large series and randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these results.

Laparoscopic gynecological surgery under minimally invasive anesthesia: a prospective cohort study.

The purpose of this study is to assess the feasibility and the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic gynecological surgery in regional anesthesia (RA) from the point of view of the surgeon, anesthesiologist and patient. This is a prospective cohort study comprising sixty-six women planned to undergo gynecologic laparoscopy surgery for benign pathology at tertiary care gynecolgical center of the University Federico II of Naples. Women were assigned, according to their preference, to either RA (Group A) or general anesthesia (GA) (Group B). Surgical, anesthesiologic and postoperative recovery data were recorded. Postoperative pain was considered as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included mobilization, length of hospital stay, global surgeons and patient satisfaction, intraoperative pain assessment in Group A. Immediate postoperative pain was significantly lower in Group A 0 vs 2 (p < 0.001), with no significant differences at 24 h. The secondary outcome demonstrated early patient's mobilization (p < 0.001) as well as early discharge (p < 0.001) and greater patient's satisfaction for the Group A. In these patients, a maximum pain score of 3 points out of 5 was recorded through the entire surgery. RA showed to decrease the impact of surgical stress and to guarantee a quicker recovery without compromising surgical results. Although several surgical approaches can be employed to treat different conditions, RA technique could be a viable option for well-selected patients affected by gynecological diseases.

A clinical score, including biohumoral parameters, is a useful pretest index to discriminate pulmonary infections from radiation damage in chemoradiation-treated lung cancer patients.

To obtain an easy and prompt differential diagnosis between lower airways infections and acute radiation pneumonitis in chemoradiation lung cancer patients. From 303 patients treated, only patients with severe pulmonary symptoms were hospitalized. Clinical and radiation scores were calculated evaluating clinical, biohumoral, dosimetric parameters. Out of 36 patients hospitalized, infections and acute radiation pneumonitis were reported in 66.7% and 33.3%, respectively. Patients with clinical score ≥ 2 had an Odds Ratio of 3.4 (1.4-8.3; p = .006) to have infectious pneumonia, while radiation score was not predictive.

Accident proneness and impulsiveness in an Italian group of burn patients.

There is controversy about the existence of a predisposition to burn incidents (accident proneness). Our objective was to examine, in a group of burn patients, the conditions or "unconscious" subjective predisposition, the presence of impulsiveness that may have contributed to bringing about the "burn" event, and to assess the presence of psychiatric diagnoses and specific characteristics of temperament. 25 consecutive burn patients were interviewed by using specific psychometric tests. The sample was divided into two groups: "control" group (N=10), composed of subjects who had accidentally been involved in the incident and "case" group (N=15) composed of subjects who had very likely and more or less "knowingly" put themselves at risk of injury. We observed a marked statistically significant difference with case group subjects appearing to be more impulsive than the ones in control group. Higher levels of impulsiveness may predispose case group patients to a greater risk of burn. Our survey also seems to reveal a relationship between impulsiveness and the proneness of some subjects to burns.