Prognostic impact of the 8th edition of American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) cancer staging system on clinically negative lymph nodes (cN0) breast cancer patients.

In 2017, the 8th edition of American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Staging Manual released the updating of TNM. The new edition introduces changes concerning tumor classification that could have a real innovative and useful clinical impact. The purpose of the study is to compare anatomic vs. prognostic stage group introduced in the new edition of AJCC staging system and its importance in clinical practice. We retrospectively analyzed the prognostic stage group introduced by the 8th edition of the AJCC staging system for breast cancer. We restaged a large series of patients with infiltrative breast cancer from 2004 to 2017 applying the AJCC 8th Edition prognostic stage group criteria. This study included 1575 patients with all molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Our follow-up included disease-free survival (DFS), disease-related survival (DRS), and overall survival (OS) data. Kaplan-Meier test was used for statistical analysis. The median follow-up was 7 years. The 5-year and 10-year OS were 96% and 90%, respectively. From our analysis, according to the 8th edition, the majority of patients included in the cohort had a down-staging to a better prognostic group except the triple-negative tumors. Most of the anatomic stage IIA turned into IA and IB. This new staging system seems to better relate to prognosis. Therefore, the prognostic stage represents an important support in breast cancer management since it could avoid unnecessary and ineffective therapies; in contrast, it could help realize the global evaluation of the risk of relapse/response to specific treatments, leading to a significant reduction in the national health cost.

Intraoperative fetal heart monitoring for non-obstetric surgery: A systematic review.

Limited data are available on fetal monitoring during non-obstetric surgery in pregnancy. We performed a systematic review to evaluate the incidence of emergent cesarean delivery performed for non-reassuring fetal heart rate patterns during non-obstetric surgery. Electronic databases were searched from their inception until October 2018 without limit for language. We included studies evaluating at least five cases of intraoperative fetal heart rate monitoring -either with ultrasound or cardiotocography- during non-obstetric surgery in pregnant women at ≥22 weeks of gestation. The primary outcome was the incidence of intraoperative cesarean delivery performed for non-reassuring fetal heart rate monitoring. Non-reassuring fetal heart rate monitoring was defined by attendant personnel, meeting NICHD criteria for category II or III patterns. Data extracted regarded type of study, demographic characteristics, maternal and perinatal outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed for continuous outcomes by calculating mean and standard deviations for appropriate variables. Of 120 studies identified, 4 with 41 cases of intraoperative monitoring met criteria for inclusion and were analyzed. Most (66%) surgeries were indicated for neurological or abdominal maternal issues and were performed under general anesthesia (88%) at a mean gestational age of 28 weeks. Minimal or absent fetal heart variability was noted in most cases and a 10-25 beats per minutes decrease in fetal heart rate baseline was observed in cases with general anesthesia. No intraoperative cesarean deliveries were needed. The incidence of non-reassuring fetal heart rate monitoring was 4.9% (2/41) and were limited to fetal tachycardia during maternal fever. Two (4.9%) cases of non-reassuring fetal heart rate monitoring were noted within the immediate 48 h after surgery, necessitating cesarean delivery. A single case of intrauterine fetal demise occurred four days postoperatively in a woman who had neurosurgery and remained comatose. In conclusion, limited data exist regarding the clinical application of fetal heart rate monitoring at viable gestational ages during non-obstetric surgical procedures. Fetal heart rate monitoring during non-obstetric surgery at ≥22 weeks was not associated with need for intraoperative cesarean delivery, but two (4.9%) cesarean deliveries were performed for non-reassuring fetal heart rate monitoring within 48 h after surgery.