Análise do controle da toxoplasmose gestacional e ocular nos serviços de Atenção Primária da 15ª Regional de Saúde do Paraná / Control analysis of pregnancy and ocular toxoplasmosis in Primary Care centers of the 15th Health Division of the state of Parana

Introdução: A primo-infecção pelo Toxoplasma gondii na gestação causa um risco de transmissão fetal entre 10% e 100%. Em 2006, a 15ª Regional de Saúde do Paraná criou a Rede de Controle da Toxoplasmose Gestacional e Congênita com referência para o Hospital Universitário de Maringá. Objetivo: avaliar as medidas adotadas pelos profissionais da Atenção Primária, para o controle da toxoplasmose gestacional e ocular. Método: Foram sorteadas 20% das 39 Unidades Básicas de Saúde de quatro municípios pertencentes à 15ª Regional de Saúde. A abordagem aos profissionais que assistiam as gestantes foi mediada por um questionário estruturado. Os dados coletados foram sobre as medidas realizadas: com gestantes soro não reagentes, com suspeita aguda, e com toxoplasmose ocular. Resultados: A maioria dos profissionais desconhecia a rede de controle, maneiras de infecção e medidas profiláticas para toxoplasmose. Conclusão: Isto mostra a importância da atualização profissional e perseverança da educação continuada (AU)

INTRODUCTION The primary infection by Toxoplasma gondii in pregnancy leads to a 10%--100% risk of fetal transmission. In 2006, the15th Health Division of the state of Paraná created the Network for Gestational and Congenital Toxoplasmosis Control with reference to the University Hospital of the city of Maringá. OBJECTIVE to evaluate the measures taken by primary care professionals regarding the control of gestational and ocular toxoplasmosis. METHOD Twenty percent of the 39 Basic Health Units in four municipalities belonging to the 15th Health Division of Paraná. The professionals who attended the pregnant women were interviewed through structured questionnaires. Data were collected on the measures carried out with non-reactive pregnant women, with acute suspicion, and ocular toxoplasmosis. RESULTS Most professionals were unaware of this control network, of the mode of infection, and the toxoplasmosis prophylactic measures. CONCLUSION This shows the importance of professional updating, and perseverance in continuing education (AU)

Clinical and molecular characterization of Diastrophic Dysplasia in the Portuguese population.

SLC26A2-related dysplasias encompass a spectrum of diseases: from lethal achondrogenesis type 1B (ACG1B; MIM #600972) and atelosteogenesis type 2 (AO2; MIM #256050) to classical diastrophic dysplasia (cDTD; MIM #222600) and recessive multiple epiphyseal dysplasia (rMED; MIM #226900). This study aimed at characterizing clinically, radiologically and molecularly 14 patients affected by non-lethal SLC26A2-related dysplasias and at evaluating genotype-phenotype correlation. Phenotypically, eight patients were classified as cDTD, four patients as rMED and two patients had an intermediate phenotype (mild DTD - mDTD, previously 'DTD variant'). The Arg279Trp mutation was present in all patients, either in homozygosity (resulting in rMED) or in compound heterozygosity with the known severe alleles Arg178Ter or Asn425Asp (resulting in DTD) or with the mutation c.727-1G>C (causing mDTD). The 'Finnish mutation', c.-26+2T>C, and the p.Cys653Ser, both frequent mutations in non-Portuguese populations, were not identified in any of the patients of our cohort and are probably very rare in the Portuguese population. A targeted mutation analysis for p.Arg279Trp and p.Arg178Ter in the Portuguese population allows the identification of approximately 90% of the pathogenic alleles.

Systematic review and economic modelling of effectiveness and cost utility of surgical treatments for men with benign prostatic enlargement.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost utility of procedures alternative to TURP (transurethral resection of the prostate) for benign prostatic enlargement (BPE) unresponsive to expectant, non-surgical treatments. DATA SOURCES: Electronic searches of 13 databases to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). REVIEW METHODS: Two reviewers independently assessed study quality and extracted data. The International Prostate Symptom Score/American Urological Association (IPSS/AUA) symptom score was the primary outcome; others included quality of life, peak urine flow rate and adverse effects. Cost-effectiveness was assessed using a Markov model reflecting likely care pathways. RESULTS: 156 reports describing 88 RCTs were included. Most had fewer than 100 participants (range 12-234). TURP provided consistent, high-level, long-term symptomatic improvement. Minimally invasive procedures resulted in less marked improvement. Ablative procedures gave improvements equivalent to TURP. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) additionally resulted in greater improvement in flow rate. HoLEP is unique amongst the newer technologies in offering an advantage in urodynamic outcomes over TURP, although long-term follow-up data are lacking. Severe blood loss was more common following TURP. Rates of incontinence were similar across all interventions other than transurethral needle ablation (TUNA) and laser coagulation, for which lower rates were reported. Acute retention and reoperation were commoner with newer technologies, especially minimally invasive interventions. The economic model suggested that minimally invasive procedures were unlikely to be cost-effective compared with TURP. Transurethral vaporisation of the prostate (TUVP) was both less costly and less effective than TURP. HoLEP was estimated to be more cost-effective than a single TURP but less effective than a strategy involving repeat TURP if necessary. The base-case analysis suggested an 80% chance that TUVP, followed by HoLEP if required, would be cost-effective at a threshold of 20,000 pounds per quality-adjusted life-year. At a 50,000 pounds threshold, TUVP, followed by TURP as required, would be cost-effective, although considerable uncertainty surrounds this finding. The main limitations are the quantity and quality of the data available, in the context of multiple comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of strong evidence in favour of newer methods, the standard--TURP--remains both clinically effective and cost-effective. There is a need for further research to establish (i) how many years of medical treatment are necessary to offset the cost of treatment with a minimally invasive or ablative intervention; (ii) more cost-effective alternatives to TURP; and (iii) strategies to improve outcomes after TURP.

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: systematic reviews and economic evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic, laparoscopically assisted (hereafter together described as laparoscopic surgery) and hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) in comparison with open surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases were searched from 2000 to May 2005. A review of economic evaluations was undertaken by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in 2001. This review was updated from 2000 until July 2005. REVIEW METHODS: Data from selected studies were extracted and assessed. Dichotomous outcome data from individual trials were combined using the relative risk method and continuous outcomes were combined using the Mantel-Haenszel weighted mean difference method. Summaries of the results from individual patient data (IPD) meta-analyses were also presented. An economic evaluation was also carried out using a Markov model incorporating the data from the systematic review. The results were first presented as a balance sheet for comparison of the surgical techniques. It was then used to estimate cost-effectiveness measured in terms of incremental cost per life-year gained and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for a time horizon up to 25 years. RESULTS: Forty-six reports on 20 studies [19 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and one IPD meta-analysis] were included in the review of clinical effectiveness. The RCTs were of generally moderate quality with the number of participants varying between 16 and 1082, with 10 having less than 100 participants. The total numbers of trial participants who underwent laparoscopic or open surgery were 2429 and 2139, respectively. A systematic review of four papers suggested that laparoscopic surgery is more costly than open surgery. However, the data they provided on effectiveness was poorer than the evidence from the review of effectiveness. The estimates from the systematic review of clinical effectiveness were incorporated into a Markov model used to estimate cost-effectiveness for a time horizon of up to 25 years. In terms of incremental cost per life-year, laparoscopic surgery was found to be more costly and no more effective than open surgery. With respect to incremental cost per QALY, few data were available to differentiate between laparoscopic and open surgery. The results of the base-case analysis indicate that there is an approximately 40% chance that laparoscopic surgery is the more cost-effective intervention at a threshold willingness to pay for a QALY of pound 30,000. A second analysis assuming equal mortality and disease-free survival found that there was an approximately 50% likelihood at a similar threshold value. Broadly similar results were found in the sensitivity analyses. A threshold analysis was performed to investigate the magnitude of QALY gain associated with quicker recovery following laparoscopic surgery required to provide an incremental cost per QALY of pound 30,000. The implied number of additional QALYs required would be 0.009-0.010 compared with open surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic resection is associated with a quicker recovery (shorter time to return to usual activities and length of hospitalisation) and no evidence of a difference in mortality or disease-free survival up to 3 years following surgery. However, operation times are longer and a significant number of procedures initiated laparoscopically may need to be converted to open surgery. The rate of conversion may be dependent on experience in terms of both patient selection and performing the technique. Laparoscopic resection appears more costly to the health service than open resection, with an estimated extra total cost of between pound 250 and pound 300 per patient. In terms of relative cost-effectiveness, laparoscopic resection is associated with a modest additional cost, short-term benefits associated with more rapid recovery and similar long-term outcomes in terms of survival and cure rates up to 3 years. Assuming equivalence of long-term outcomes, a judgement is required as to whether the benefits associated with earlier recovery are worth this extra cost. The long-term follow-up of the RCT cohorts would be very useful further research and ideally these data should be incorporated into a wider IPD meta-analysis. Data on the long-term complications of surgery such as incisional hernias and differences in outcomes such as persisting pain would also be valuable. Once available, further data on both costs and utilities should be included in an updated model. At this point, further consideration should then be given as to whether additional data should be collected within ongoing trials. Few data were available to assess the relative merits of HALS. Ideally, there should be more data from methodologically sound RCTs. Further research is needed on whether the balance of advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic surgery varies within subgroups based on the different stages and locations of disease. Research relating to the effect of experience on performance is also required.