RESUMEN
A 60-year old woman was admitted for reintroduction of interferon/ribavirin combination therapy to prevent the recurrence of hepatitis C following living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). She had also undergone splenectomy during LDLT to avoid postoperative pancytopenia due to hypersplenism. However, a few days after reintroduction of the therapy, she developed severe diarrhea and fever that progressed to circulatory and respiratory shock. Blood culture was positive for Streptococcus pneumoniae, leading to a diagnosis of overwhelming postsplenectomy infection (OPSI). Although the patient developed multi-organ failure, she ultimately recovered after intensive care including mechanical ventilation and hemodialysis. Once OPSI is suspected, intensive care should be commenced immediately given the disease' s fulminant clinical course and high mortality. Postoperative prophylaxis with the pneumococcal vaccine needs to be tested in a multi-center study.
Asunto(s)
Hepatitis C/terapia , Interferones/administración & dosificación , Trasplante de Hígado , Donadores Vivos , Infecciones Neumocócicas/etiología , Ribavirina/administración & dosificación , Esplenectomía , Cuidados Críticos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Complicaciones Posoperatorias , Recurrencia , Esplenectomía/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Totally implantable central venous access ports, are required for various purposes, ranging from chemotherapy to nutrition. Port infection is a common complication. In many patients with port infection, the ports are removed because antibiotics are ineffective. We evaluated the risk factors associated with port removal due to port infection. METHODS: By retrospective chart review, we collected data of 223 patients who underwent port removal for any reason. Port infection was defined as infection symptoms, such as fever; elevated white blood cell counts or C-reactive protein levels; or redness at the port site, in the absence of other infections, which improved with port removal. The characteristics of patients with or without port infection were compared using univariate (chi-squared test, t-test) and multivariate logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: We compared 172 patients without port infection to 51 patients with port infection. Univariate analysis identified sex (p = 0.01), body mass index (BMI) ⩽20 kg/m2 (p = 0.00004), diabetes mellitus (p = 0.04), and purpose of use (p = 0.0000003) as significant variables. However, male sex (p = 0.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.01-0.23), BMI ⩽20 kg m2 (p = 0.002, 95% CI: 0.06-0.29), and purpose of use (total parenteral nutrition (TPN); p = 0.000005, 95% CI: 0.31-0.76) remained significant using multivariate analysis. Moreover, the patients with short bowel syndrome and difficulty in oral intake tended to be infected easily. Additionally, Staphylococcus species were the most common microbes involved in port infection. CONCLUSIONS: Male sex, BMI ⩽20 kg/m2, and purpose of use as a TPN were risk factors for port infection. Ports should not be used for long duration of TPN or used only in exceptional cases.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND/AIM: Stage III breast cancer comprises a broad spectrum of disease, including the extent of supraclavicular/internal mammary lymph node metastasis. In this study, we evaluated the usefulness of the absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in predicting the prognosis of patients with stage III breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-five patients with stage III breast cancer who underwent surgery were included. We compared their clinicopathological factors according to the presence or not of supraclavicular/internal mammary lymph node metastasis, and pretreatment ALC or NLR. RESULTS: Patients with metastasis of the studied lymph nodes had a poorer prognosis in comparison to those without metastasis. In patients without these types of lymph node metastasis, both the ALC and NLR were predictive factors for relapse-free and overall survival. Among these patients, those with a low ALC or high NLR had recurrence-free and overall survival comparable to those of patients with supraclavicular/internal mammary lymph node metastasis. CONCLUSION: Pretreatment ALC and NLR were prognostic factors for patients with stage III breast cancer.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Linfocitos/patología , Neutrófilos/patología , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Ganglios Linfáticos/patología , Metástasis Linfática/patología , Recuento de Linfocitos/métodos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/patología , PronósticoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The central venous access port (CVAP) has played an important role in the safe administration of chemotherapy and parenteral nutrition. The aim of the present study was to clarify the optimal access vein for CVAP implantation when performed by residents rather than attending surgeons. METHODS: A consecutive cases of CVAP implantation via the subclavian vein (SV) using a landmark-guided technique or via the internal jugular vein (JV) using an ultrasound-guided technique were divided into 2 groups according to whether the intervention was performed by a resident or an attending surgeon. Early and late complications were compared retrospectively between the 2 groups, and the outcomes of the CVAPs were compared between those implanted via the SV and those implanted via the JV in resident group. RESULTS: A total of 207 cases of CVAP implantation were performed. Overall, 114 implantations were performed by residents, and another 93 implantations were performed by attending surgeons. Early complications were seen more frequently in the resident group (6.1%) than in the attending-surgeon group (1.1%), but the difference was not significant. No differences in operating time or late complications were observed between the 2 groups. In the resident group, CVAP implantations via the JV using the ultrasound-guided technique were associated with a shorter operating time compared with the SV approach. CONCLUSIONS: Residents can perform CVAP implantations safely using both the SV and JV approaches. However, the JV approach using an ultrasound-guided technique can be performed in less time than the SV approach.