RESUMO
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Natural disasters are on the rise, driven by shifts in climatic patterns largely attributed to human-induced climate change. This relentless march of climate change intensifies the frequency and severity of these disasters, heightening the vulnerability of communities and causing significant harm to both lives and socio-economic systems. Healthcare services are particularly strained during extreme weather events, with impacts felt not only on infrastructure but also on patient care. RECENT FINDINGS: This narrative review explored the overarching impact of natural disasters on healthcare infrastructure. We delved into how these disasters impact diverse health conditions, the healthcare systems of low and middle-income countries (LMICs), the psychological toll on both clinicians and survivors, and the ramifications for end-of-life care. SUMMARY: Natural disasters significantly impact healthcare, especially in LMICs due to their limited resources. Patients with cancer or chronic diseases struggle to access care following a natural disaster. Those in need for palliative care experience delay due to shortages in medical resources. Psychological consequences like posttraumatic stress disorder on disaster survivors and healthcare providers highlight the need for mental health support. Addressing challenges requires proactive disaster preparedness policies and urgent public policy initiatives are needed for optimal disaster response.
Assuntos
Atenção à Saúde , Desastres Naturais , Humanos , Atenção à Saúde/organização & administração , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de Saúde/organização & administração , Planejamento em Desastres/organização & administração , Países em Desenvolvimento , Mudança Climática , Assistência Terminal/psicologia , Assistência Terminal/organização & administração , Transtornos de Estresse Pós-Traumáticos/epidemiologia , Transtornos de Estresse Pós-Traumáticos/psicologiaRESUMO
PURPOSE: Smoking is a recognized risk factor for bladder BC and lung cancer LC. We investigated the enduring risk of BC after smoking cessation using U.S. national survey data. Our analysis focused on comparing characteristics of LC and BC patients, emphasizing smoking status and the latency period from smoking cessation to cancer diagnosis in former smokers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed data from the National Health and Examination Survey (2003-2016), identifying adults with LC or BC history. Smoking status (never, active, former) and the interval between quitting smoking and cancer diagnosis for former smokers were assessed. We reported descriptive statistics using frequencies and percentages for categorical variables and median with interquartile ranges (IQR) for continuous variables. RESULTS: Among LC patients, 8.9% never smoked, 18.9% active smokers, and 72.2% former smokers. Former smokers had a median interval of 8 years (IQR 2-12) between quitting and LC diagnosis, with 88.3% quitting within 0-19 years before diagnosis. For BC patients, 26.8% never smoked, 22.4% were active smokers, and 50.8% former smokers. Former smokers had a median interval of 21 years (IQR 14-33) between quitting and BC diagnosis, with 49.3% quitting within 0-19 years before diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: BC patients exhibit a prolonged latency period between smoking cessation and cancer diagnosis compared to LC patients. Despite smoking status evaluation in microhematuria, current risk stratification models for urothelial cancer do not incorporate it. Our findings emphasize the significance of long-term post-smoking cessation surveillance and advocate for integrating smoking history into future risk stratification guidelines.
Assuntos
Abandono do Hábito de Fumar , Neoplasias da Bexiga Urinária , Adulto , Humanos , Inquéritos Nutricionais , Fumar/efeitos adversos , Neoplasias da Bexiga Urinária/etiologia , PulmãoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has improved the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), and microultrasound (micro-US) shows promise in enhancing detection rates. We compared mpMRI-guided targeted biopsy (MTBx) and micro-US-guided targeted biopsy (micro-US-TBx) in biopsy-naïve patients with discordant lesions at micro-US and mpMRI to detect csPCa (grade group ≥2) and clinically insignificant PCa (ciPCa; grade group 1) and assessed the role of nontargeted systematic biopsy (SBx). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We analyzed 178 biopsy-naive men with suspected PCa and discordant lesions at mpMRI and micro-US. All patients underwent mpMRI followed by micro-US, the latter being performed immediately before the biopsy. Imaging findings were interpreted blindly, followed by targeted and SBx. Median age was 63 years (IQR, 57-70), median prostate-specific antigen level was 7 ng/mL (IQR, 5-9 ng/mL), and median prostate volume was 49 cm^3 (IQR, 35-64 cm^3). Overall, 86/178 (48%) patients were diagnosed with PCa, 51/178 (29%) with csPCa. RESULTS: Micro-USTBx detected csPCa in 36/178 men (20%; 95% CI: 26-46), and MTBx detected csPCa in 28/178 men (16%; 95% CI: 36-50), resulting in a -8% difference (95% CI: -10, 4; Pâ¯=â¯0.022) and a relative detection rate of 0.043. Micro-USTBx detected ciPCa in 9/178 men (5%; 95% CI: 3, 15), while MTBx detected ciPCa in 12/178 men (7%; 95% CI: 5, 20), resulting in a -3% difference (95% CI: -2 to 4; Pâ¯=â¯0.2) and a relative detection rate of 0.1. SBx detected ciPCa in 29 (16%) men. mpMRI plus micro-US detected csPCa in 51/178 men, with no additional cases with the addition of SBx. Similarly, MTBx plus micro-USTBx plus SBx detected ciPCa in 35/178 men (20%; 95% CI: 18, 37) compared to 9 (5%) in the micro-US pathway (Pâ¯=â¯0.002) and 14/178 (8%; 95% CI: 6, 26) in the mpMRI plus micro-US pathway (Pâ¯=â¯0.004). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, a combined micro-US/mpMRI approach could characterize primary disease in biopsy-naïve patients with discordant lesions, potentially avoiding SBx. Further studies are needed to validate our findings and assess micro-US's role in reducing unnecessary biopsies.
RESUMO
ABSTRACT Purpose: Smoking is a recognized risk factor for bladder BC and lung cancer LC. We investigated the enduring risk of BC after smoking cessation using U.S. national survey data. Our analysis focused on comparing characteristics of LC and BC patients, emphasizing smoking status and the latency period from smoking cessation to cancer diagnosis in former smokers. Materials and Methods: We analyzed data from the National Health and Examination Survey (2003-2016), identifying adults with LC or BC history. Smoking status (never, active, former) and the interval between quitting smoking and cancer diagnosis for former smokers were assessed. We reported descriptive statistics using frequencies and percentages for categorical variables and median with interquartile ranges (IQR) for continuous variables. Results: Among LC patients, 8.9% never smoked, 18.9% active smokers, and 72.2% former smokers. Former smokers had a median interval of 8 years (IQR 2-12) between quitting and LC diagnosis, with 88.3% quitting within 0-19 years before diagnosis. For BC patients, 26.8% never smoked, 22.4% were active smokers, and 50.8% former smokers. Former smokers had a median interval of 21 years (IQR 14-33) between quitting and BC diagnosis, with 49.3% quitting within 0-19 years before diagnosis. Conclusions: BC patients exhibit a prolonged latency period between smoking cessation and cancer diagnosis compared to LC patients. Despite smoking status evaluation in microhematuria, current risk stratification models for urothelial cancer do not incorporate it. Our findings emphasize the significance of long-term post-smoking cessation surveillance and advocate for integrating smoking history into future risk stratification guidelines.