Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
1.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg ; 58(4): 752-762, 2020 Oct 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32862224

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: There is widespread acknowledgement that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has disrupted surgical services. The European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS) sent out a survey to assess what impact the COVID-19 pandemic has had on the practice of thoracic oncology surgery. METHODS: All ESTS members were invited (13-20 April 2020) to complete an online questionnaire of 26 questions, designed by the ESTS learning affairs committee. RESULTS: The response rate was 23.0% and the completeness rate was 91.2%. The number of treated COVID-positive cases per hospital varied from fewer than 20 cases (30.6%) to more than 200 cases (22.7%) per hospital. Most hospitals (89.1%) postponed surgical procedures. All hospitals performed patient screening with a nasopharyngeal swab, but only 6.7% routinely tested health care workers. A total of 20% of respondents reported that multidisciplinary meetings were completely cancelled and 66%, that multidisciplinary decisions were not different from normal practice. Trends were recognized in prioritizing surgical patients based on age (younger than 70), type of surgery (lobectomy or less), size of tumour (T1-2) and lymph node involvement (N1). Sixty-three percent of respondents reported that surgeons were involved in daily care of COVID-19-positive patients. Fifty-three percent mentioned that full personal protective equipment was available to them when treating a COVID-19-positive patient. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has created issues for the safety of health care workers, and surgeons have been forced to change their routine practice. However, there was no consensus about surgical priorities in lung cancer patients, demonstrating the need for the production of specific guidelines.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus , Infecções por Coronavirus , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral , Padrões de Prática Médica/tendências , Neoplasias Torácicas/cirurgia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Torácicos/tendências , COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Europa (Continente) , Saúde Global , Alocação de Recursos para a Atenção à Saúde/tendências , Humanos , Controle de Infecções/métodos , Controle de Infecções/tendências , Assistência Perioperatória/métodos , Assistência Perioperatória/tendências , Pneumonia Viral/diagnóstico , Pneumonia Viral/terapia , SARS-CoV-2 , Sociedades Médicas
2.
Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg ; 28(4): 518-525, 2019 04 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30496443

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: In Siewert type I/II oesophageal adenocarcinoma, the sensitivity and specificity of computed tomography (CT), positron emission tomography (PET)-CT and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for assessment of the N descriptor in defined groups of lymph nodes were investigated. METHODS: CT, PET/CT, EUS images and the pathological data of 101 oesophageal adenocarcinomas submitted to primary resection were compared. The lymph nodes were identified as (a) right paratracheal/subcarinal/pulmonary ligament; (b) paraoesophageal; (c) paracardial; (d) left gastric artery, lesser curvature; (e) coeliac trunk, hepatic/splenic artery. RESULTS: Of the 2451 lymph nodes identified, 273 (11.1%) were histologically positive. Overall sensitivity, specificity and negative and positive predictive value for detection of lymph nodes metastatic were respectively: CT sensitivity 39%, specificity 86%, negative 58% and positive 74% predictive value; PET/CT sensitivity 30%, specificity 98%, negative 58% and positive 93% predictive value; EUS sensitivity 50%, specificity 81%, negative 72% and positive 62% predictive value. The sensitivity of CT, PET/CT and EUS in the thoracic nodal groups (a) and (b) was, respectively, 58.3%, 7.1% and 87.5% and 33.3%, 20% and 80%. Sensitivity was below 47% for all tests in the abdominal nodal groups. In contrast, specificity (88.6-100%) was super imposable in all nodal groups. The strength of agreement among the 3 imaging techniques was poor (kappa < 0.30) for the thoracic anatomical groups of interest: (a) lower paratracheal/subcarinal/pulmonary ligament and (b) paraoesophageal; it was moderate/good (kappa >0.30) for the abdominal N groups of interest: c, d and e. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic performance of CT, PET and EUS for assessing the N descriptor in the paracardial and abdominal stations close to the primary tumour is not satisfactory. EUS can efficiently assess the presence/absence of nodal metastases in the thoracic stations. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT03529968.


Assuntos
Adenocarcinoma/diagnóstico por imagem , Adenocarcinoma/patologia , Endossonografia , Neoplasias Esofágicas/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias Esofágicas/patologia , Tomografia por Emissão de Pósitrons combinada à Tomografia Computadorizada , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios X , Adenocarcinoma/cirurgia , Idoso , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirurgia , Feminino , Humanos , Linfonodos/patologia , Metástase Linfática , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA