| 1. |
- Tarkkanen, Maija, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparative genomic hybridization of postirradiation sarcomas
- 2001
-
Ingår i: Cancer. - 1097-0142. ; 92:7, s. 1992-1998
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND. Radiotherapy is a known risk factor for sarcoma development. Postirradiation sarcomas arise within the radiation field after a latency period of several years and usually are highly malignant. Very little is yet known about their genetic changes. METHODS. Twenty-seven postirradiation sarcomas were analyzed by comparative genomic hybridization, which allows genome-wide screening of DNA sequence copy number changes. RESULTS. Copy-number aberrations were detected in 20 (74%) tumors. The mean number of aberrations per tumor was 5.3 with gains outnumbering losses. The most frequent gains affected the minimal common regions of 7q11.2-q21 and 7q22 in 30% and 7p15-pter in 26%. Gain of 8q23-qter was detected in 22%. The most frequent losses affected 11q23-qter and 13q22-q32 in 22%. In osteosarcomas, the most frequent aberration was loss of 1p21-p31, in malignant fibrous histiocytomas (MFH) gain of 7cen-q22, and in fibrosarcomas gain of 7q22. The findings in postirradiation osteosarcomas and MFHs were compared with findings in sporadic osteosarcomas and MFHs, reported previously by the authors. In sporadic osteosarcomas, gains outnumbered losses, but, in postirradiation osteosarcomas, losses were more frequent than gains. Loss at 1p was rare in sporadic osteosarcoma (3%) but frequent (57%) in postirradiation osteosarcomas. Gains at 7q were frequent both in postirradiation and sporadic MFH. CONCLUSIONS. According to previous studies on different types of sporadic sarcomas, gains at 7q or 8q are associated with poor prognosis or large tumor size. Thus, the frequent gains at 7q and 8q might have been responsible in part for the poor prognosis of postirradiation sarcomas. Also, however, some of their clinical features, i.e., high malignancy grade, late diagnosis, and central location, are associated with a poor prognosis.
|
|
| 2. |
- Martin, David, et al.
(författare)
-
Defining Major Surgery: A Delphi Consensus Among European Surgical Association (ESA) Members
- 2020
-
Ingår i: World Journal of Surgery. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0364-2313 .- 1432-2323. ; 44:7, s. 2211-2219
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- © 2020, Société Internationale de Chirurgie. Background: Major surgery is a term frequently used but poorly defined. The aim of the present study was to reach a consensus in the definition of major surgery within a panel of expert surgeons from the European Surgical Association (ESA). Methods: A 3-round Delphi process was performed. All ESA members were invited to participate in the expert panel. In round 1, experts were inquired by open- and closed-ended questions on potential criteria to define major surgery. Results were analyzed and presented back anonymously to the panel within next rounds. Closed-ended questions in round 2 and 3 were either binary or statements to be rated on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strong disagreement) to 5 (strong agreement). Participants were sent 3 reminders at 2-week intervals for each round. 70% of agreement was considered to indicate consensus. Results: Out of 305 ESA members, 67 (22%) answered all the 3 rounds. Significant comorbidities were the only preoperative factor retained to define major surgery (78%). Vascular clampage or organ ischemia (92%), high intraoperative blood loss (90%), high noradrenalin requirements (77%), long operative time (73%) and perioperative blood transfusion (70%) were procedure-related factors that reached consensus. Regarding postoperative factors, systemic inflammatory response (76%) and the need for intensive or intermediate care (88%) reached consensus. Consequences of major surgery were high morbidity (>30% overall) and mortality (>2%). Conclusion: ESA experts defined major surgery according to extent and complexity of the procedure, its pathophysiological consequences and consecutive clinical outcomes.
|
|
| 3. |
- Vonlanthen, René, et al.
(författare)
-
Toward a Consensus on Centralization in Surgery.
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Annals of surgery. - 1528-1140. ; 268:5, s. 712-724
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- To critically assess centralization policies for highly specialized surgeries in Europe and North America and propose recommendations.Most countries are increasingly forced to maintain quality medicine at a reasonable cost. An all-inclusive perspective, including health care providers, payers, society as a whole and patients, has ubiquitously failed, arguably for different reasons in environments. This special article follows 3 aims: first, analyze health care policies for centralization in different countries, second, analyze how centralization strategies affect patient outcome and other aspects such as medical education and cost, and third, propose recommendations for centralization, which could apply across continents.Conflicting interests have led many countries to compromise for a health care system based on factors beyond best patient-oriented care. Centralization has been a common strategy, but modalities vary greatly among countries with no consensus on the minimal requirement for the number of procedures per center or per surgeon. Most national policies are either partially or not implemented. Data overwhelmingly indicate that concentration of complex care or procedures in specialized centers have positive impacts on quality of care and cost. Countries requiring lower threshold numbers for centralization, however, may cause inappropriate expansion of indications, as hospitals struggle to fulfill the criteria. Centralization requires adjustments in training and credentialing of general and specialized surgeons, and patient education.There is an obvious need in most areas for effective centralization. Unrestrained, purely "market driven" approaches are deleterious to patients and society. Centralization should not be based solely on minimal number of procedures, but rather on the multidisciplinary treatment of complex diseases including well-trained specialists available around the clock. Audited prospective database with monitoring of quality of care and cost are mandatory.
|
|
