| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Khatri, C, et al.
(författare)
-
Outcomes after perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with proximal femoral fractures: an international cohort study
- 2021
-
Ingår i: BMJ open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 11:11, s. e050830-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Studies have demonstrated high rates of mortality in people with proximal femoral fracture and SARS-CoV-2, but there is limited published data on the factors that influence mortality for clinicians to make informed treatment decisions. This study aims to report the 30-day mortality associated with perioperative infection of patients undergoing surgery for proximal femoral fractures and to examine the factors that influence mortality in a multivariate analysis.SettingProspective, international, multicentre, observational cohort study.ParticipantsPatients undergoing any operation for a proximal femoral fracture from 1 February to 30 April 2020 and with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection (either 7 days prior or 30-day postoperative).Primary outcome30-day mortality. Multivariate modelling was performed to identify factors associated with 30-day mortality.ResultsThis study reports included 1063 patients from 174 hospitals in 19 countries. Overall 30-day mortality was 29.4% (313/1063). In an adjusted model, 30-day mortality was associated with male gender (OR 2.29, 95% CI 1.68 to 3.13, p<0.001), age >80 years (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.31, p=0.013), preoperative diagnosis of dementia (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.16, p=0.005), kidney disease (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.55, p=0.005) and congestive heart failure (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.48, p=0.025). Mortality at 30 days was lower in patients with a preoperative diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.6 (0.42 to 0.85), p=0.004). There was no difference in mortality in patients with an increase to delay in surgery (p=0.220) or type of anaesthetic given (p=0.787).ConclusionsPatients undergoing surgery for a proximal femoral fracture with a perioperative infection of SARS-CoV-2 have a high rate of mortality. This study would support the need for providing these patients with individualised medical and anaesthetic care, including medical optimisation before theatre. Careful preoperative counselling is needed for those with a proximal femoral fracture and SARS-CoV-2, especially those in the highest risk groups.Trial registration numberNCT04323644
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Eriksson, L. S.E., et al.
(författare)
-
Ultrasound-based risk model for preoperative prediction of lymph-node metastases in women with endometrial cancer : model-development study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. - : Wiley. - 0960-7692 .- 1469-0705. ; 56:3, s. 443-452
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To develop a preoperative risk model, using endometrial biopsy results and clinical and ultrasound variables, to predict the individual risk of lymph-node metastases in women with endometrial cancer. Methods: A mixed-effects logistic regression model for prediction of lymph-node metastases was developed in 1501 prospectively included women with endometrial cancer undergoing transvaginal ultrasound examination before surgery, from 16 European centers. Missing data, including missing lymph-node status, were imputed. Discrimination, calibration and clinical utility of the model were evaluated using leave-center-out cross validation. The predictive performance of the model was compared with that of risk classification from endometrial biopsy alone (high-risk defined as endometrioid cancer Grade 3/non-endometrioid cancer) or combined endometrial biopsy and ultrasound (high-risk defined as endometrioid cancer Grade 3/non-endometrioid cancer/deep myometrial invasion/cervical stromal invasion/extrauterine spread). Results: Lymphadenectomy was performed in 691 women, of whom 127 had lymph-node metastases. The model for prediction of lymph-node metastases included the predictors age, duration of abnormal bleeding, endometrial biopsy result, tumor extension and tumor size according to ultrasound and undefined tumor with an unmeasurable endometrium. The model's area under the curve was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.68–0.78), the calibration slope was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.79–1.34) and the calibration intercept was 0.06 (95% CI, –0.15 to 0.27). Using a risk threshold for lymph-node metastases of 5% compared with 20%, the model had, respectively, a sensitivity of 98% vs 48% and specificity of 11% vs 80%. The model had higher sensitivity and specificity than did classification as high-risk, according to endometrial biopsy alone (50% vs 35% and 80% vs 77%, respectively) or combined endometrial biopsy and ultrasound (80% vs 75% and 53% vs 52%, respectively). The model's clinical utility was higher than that of endometrial biopsy alone or combined endometrial biopsy and ultrasound at any given risk threshold. Conclusions: Based on endometrial biopsy results and clinical and ultrasound characteristics, the individual risk of lymph-node metastases in women with endometrial cancer can be estimated reliably before surgery. The model is superior to risk classification by endometrial biopsy alone or in combination with ultrasound.
|
|
| 6. |
- Van Den Bosch, T., et al.
(författare)
-
Typical ultrasound features of various endometrial pathologies described using International Endometrial Tumor Analysis (IETA) terminology in women with abnormal uterine bleeding
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. - : Wiley. - 0960-7692 .- 1469-0705. ; 57:1, s. 164-172
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To describe the ultrasound features of different endometrial and other intracavitary pathologies inpre- and postmenopausal women presenting with abnormal uterine bleeding, using the International Endometrial Tumor Analysis (IETA) terminology. Methods: This was a prospective observational multicenter study of consecutive women presenting with abnormal uterine bleeding. Unenhanced sonography with color Doppler and fluid-instillation sonography were performed. Endometrial sampling was performed according to each center's local protocol. The histological endpoints were cancer, atypical endometrial hyperplasia/endometrioid intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN), endometrial atrophy, proliferative or secretory endometrium, endometrial hyperplasia without atypia, endometrial polyp, intracavitary leiomyoma and other. For fluid-instillation sonography, the histological endpoints were endometrial polyp, intracavitary leiomyoma and cancer. For each histological endpoint, we report typical ultrasound features using the IETA terminology. Results: The database consisted of 2856 consecutive women presenting with abnormal uterine bleeding. Unenhanced sonography with color Doppler was performed in all cases and fluid-instillation sonography in 1857. In 2216 women, endometrial histology was available, and these comprised the study population. Median age was 49 years (range, 19–92 years), median parity was 2 (range, 0–10) and median body mass index was 24.9 kg/m2 (range, 16.0–72.1 kg/m2). Of the study population, 843 (38.0%) women were postmenopausal. Endometrial polyps were diagnosed in 751 (33.9%) women, intracavitary leiomyomas in 223 (10.1%) and endometrial cancer in 137 (6.2%). None (0% (95% CI, 0.0–5.5%)) of the 66 women with endometrial thickness < 3 mm had endometrial cancer or atypical hyperplasia/EIN. Endometrial cancer or atypical hyperplasia/EIN was found in three of 283 (1.1% (95% CI, 0.4–3.1%)) endometria with a three-layer pattern, in three of 459 (0.7% (95% CI, 0.2–1.9%)) endometria with a linear endometrial midline and in five of 337 (1.5% (95% CI, 0.6–3.4%)) cases with a single vessel without branching on unenhanced ultrasound. Conclusions: The typical ultrasound features of endometrial cancer, polyps, hyperplasia and atrophy and intracavitary leiomyomas, are described using the IETA terminology. The detection of some easy-to-assess IETA features (i.e. endometrial thickness < 3 mm, three-layer pattern, linear midline and single vessel without branching) makes endometrial cancer unlikely.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Jordans, I. P.M., et al.
(författare)
-
Definition and sonographic reporting system for Cesarean scar pregnancy in early gestation : modified Delphi method
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. - : Wiley. - 0960-7692 .- 1469-0705. ; 59:4, s. 437-449
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To develop a standardized sonographic evaluation and reporting system for Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) in the first trimester, for use by both general gynecology and expert clinics. Methods: A modified Delphi procedure was carried out, in which 28 international experts in obstetric and gynecological ultrasonography were invited to participate. Extensive experience in the use of ultrasound to evaluate Cesarean section (CS) scars in early pregnancy and/or publications concerning CSP or niche evaluation was required to participate. Relevant items for the detection and evaluation of CSP were determined based on the results of a literature search. Consensus was predefined as a level of agreement of at least 70% for each item, and a minimum of three Delphi rounds were planned (two online questionnaires and one group meeting). Results: Sixteen experts participated in the Delphi study and four Delphi rounds were performed. In total, 58 items were determined to be relevant. We differentiated between basic measurements to be performed in general practice and advanced measurements for expert centers or for research purposes. The panel also formulated advice on indications for referral to an expert clinic. Consensus was reached for all 58 items on the definition, terminology, relevant items for evaluation and reporting of CSP. It was recommended that the first CS scar evaluation to determine the location of the pregnancy should be performed at 6–7 weeks' gestation using transvaginal ultrasound. The use of magnetic resonance imaging was not considered to add value in the diagnosis of CSP. A CSP was defined as a pregnancy with implantation in, or in close contact with, the niche. The experts agreed that a CSP can occur only when a niche is present and not in relation to a healed CS scar. Relevant sonographic items to record included gestational sac (GS) size, vascularity, location in relation to the uterine vessels, thickness of the residual myometrium and location of the pregnancy in relation to the uterine cavity and serosa. According to its location, a CSP can be classified as: (1) CSP in which the largest part of the GS protrudes towards the uterine cavity; (2) CSP in which the largest part of the GS is embedded in the myometrium but does not cross the serosal contour; and (3) CSP in which the GS is partially located beyond the outer contour of the cervix or uterus. The type of CSP may change with advancing gestation. Future studies are needed to validate this reporting system and the value of the different CSP types. Conclusion: Consensus was achieved among experts regarding the sonographic evaluation and reporting of CSP in the first trimester.
|
|
| 10. |
- Loibl, S., et al.
(författare)
-
ESMO Expert Consensus Statements on the management of breast cancer during pregnancy (PrBC)
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Annals of Oncology. - 0923-7534. ; 34:10, s. 849-866
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The management of breast cancer during pregnancy (PrBC) is a relatively rare indication and an area where no or little evidence is available since randomized controlled trials cannot be conducted. In general, advances related to breast cancer (BC) treatment outside pregnancy cannot always be translated to PrBC, because both the interests of the mother and of the unborn should be considered. Evidence remains limited and/or conflicting in some specific areas where the optimal approach remains controversial. In 2022, the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) held a virtual consensus-building process on this topic to gain insights from a multidisciplinary group of experts and develop statements on controversial topics that cannot be adequately addressed in the current evidence-based ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline. The aim of this consensus-building process was to discuss controversial issues relating to the management of patients with PrBC. The virtual meeting included a multidisciplinary panel of 24 leading experts from 13 countries and was chaired by S. Loibl and F. Amant. All experts were allocated to one of four different working groups. Each working group covered a specific subject area with two chairs appointed: 1. PrBC: incidence, epidemiology, biology and pathology, diagnostic work-up, staging and risk assessment, prognosis (Chairs: Vincent Vandecaveye, Fedro Peccatori). 2. Clinical pharmacology of systemic agents during pregnancy: management of localized disease and (neo) adjuvant therapies, management of systemic disease (Chairs: Giuseppe Curigliano, Peter Schmid). 3. Obstetric care and fetal/newborn follow-up and outcomes: metastases to fetus, management of pregnancy during anticancer therapy, lactation, psychological support (Chairs: Elyce Cardonick, Mathilde van Gerwen). Planning, preparation and execution of the consensus process was conducted according to the ESMO standard operating procedures.
|
|
