Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Int J Colorectal Dis ; 39(1): 90, 2024 Jun 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38866990

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Discussions about the optimal lymph node (LN) count and its therapeutic consequences have persisted over time. The final LN count in colorectal tissues is affected by a variety of variables (patient, tumor, operation, pathologist, immune response). Methylene blue (MB) intra-arterial injection is a simple and inexpensive procedure that can be used to enhance lymph node count. AIM: Analyze whether there is a statistically significant difference between intra-arterial methylene blue injection and conventional dissection for the quantification of lymph nodes and determine if there is a variation in the quality of lymph node acquisition. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2022, we conducted a retrospective analysis of colon cancer specimens. Data on the tumor's features, the number of lymph nodes, the number of lymph nodes that were positive, and other factors had been collected. The number of identified lymph nodes was highly significantly improved in the study group (P < 0.05). There is not a significant statistical difference between groups regarding the metastatic lymph node harvest. The group with injection of intra-arterial methylene blue shows a significantly decreased (P < 0.05) of the of cases with less than 12 lymph nodes recovered comparing with the control group. CONCLUSION: Colon cancer specimens can be easily evaluated concerning lymph nodes using the methylene blue method. Therefore, we strongly advise this approach as a standard procedure in the histological evaluation of colon cancer specimens in order to maximize the identification of lymph nodes. However, the detection of metastatic lymph nodes was unaffected significantly.


Subject(s)
Colonic Neoplasms , Methylene Blue , Humans , Methylene Blue/administration & dosage , Colonic Neoplasms/pathology , Colonic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Retrospective Studies , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Aged , Lymph Nodes/pathology , Lymphatic Metastasis , Aged, 80 and over , Adult
2.
3.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34300069

ABSTRACT

Intravenous therapy administration through peripheral venous catheters is one of the most common nursing procedures performed in clinical contexts. However, peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) remain insufficiently used by nurses and can be considered a potential alternative for patients who need aggressive intravenous therapy and/or therapy for extended periods. The purpose of this study was to understand nurses' perspectives about PICC implementation in their clinical practice. As part of an action-research project, three focus groups were developed in June 2019 with nineteen nurses of a cardiology ward from a Portuguese tertiary hospital. From the content analysis, two main categories emerged: 'nursing practices' and 'patients'. Nurses considered PICC beneficial for their clinical practice because it facilitates maintenance care and catheter replacement rates. Moreover, nurses suggested that, since there is a need for specific skills, the constitution of vascular access teams, as recommended by international guidelines, could be an advantage. Regarding patient benefits, nurses highlighted a decrease in the number of venipunctures and also of patient discomfort, which was associated with the number of peripheral venous catheters. Infection prevention was also indicated. As an emerging medical device used among clinicians, peripherally inserted central catheters seem to be essential to clinical practice.


Subject(s)
Cardiology , Catheterization, Central Venous , Nurses , Catheterization, Central Venous/adverse effects , Catheters , Focus Groups , Humans
4.
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol ; 146(10): 2631-2638, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32435893

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Treatment strategies for low rectal cancer have been evolving toward achieving less treatment morbidity with the same oncological success-we aimed to assess the results of the new watch and wait (W&W) strategy in our cohort. METHODS: A tertiary care cohort study was conducted. New patients with rectal adenocarcinoma up to 6 cm from the anal margin, cM0, locally staged higher than cT1N0, evaluated between November 2014 and October 2018, were included. All 93 patients received neoadjuvant radiotherapy ± chemotherapy. Re-evaluation was planned 8-12 weeks after the end of treatment. Patients showing clinical complete response (cCR) were given the choice of either to proceed to surgery or to enter W&W. RESULTS: Of the 93 patients, 82.8% were re-evaluated and 20.8% had cCR. Patients in clinical stages II/III were significantly less likely to achieve cCR than those in stage I (p = 0.017). After a mean follow-up of 17.44 months, there were 4 regrowths in the 16 patients under W&W, all submitted to R0 surgery, ypN0; there were no deaths or local recurrences; one patient with regrowth had distant recurrence. Sixty patients underwent direct surgery after a mean follow-up of 16.23 months; 3 patients had local and distant recurrences; 7 others had only distant recurrences; there were 8 deaths. There were no statistically significant differences between patients under W&W and patients who underwent direct surgery regarding local or distant recurrences, or death (p > 0.9; p = 0.44; p = 0.19, respectively). CONCLUSION: The W&W strategy for low rectal cancer achieved the same oncological outcomes as the traditional strategy while sparing some patients from surgery.


Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/therapy , Rectal Neoplasms/therapy , Watchful Waiting/methods , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Adenocarcinoma/surgery , Aged , Chemoradiotherapy, Adjuvant , Cohort Studies , Digestive System Surgical Procedures/methods , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Neoplasm Staging , Radiotherapy, Adjuvant , Rectal Neoplasms/pathology , Rectal Neoplasms/surgery , Treatment Outcome
5.
J Vasc Access ; 18(4): 328-333, 2017 Jul 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28665464

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Centrally inserted central catheter (CICC) insertion is a commonly performed procedure that may give rise to different complications. Despite the suggestion of guidelines to use ultrasound guidance (USG) for vascular access, not all centers use it systematically. The aim of this study is to illustrate the experience with ultrasound in CICC placement at a high-volume oncological center, in a country where the landmark technique is standard. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a prospective database was performed on CICC placement under USG in the Central Venous Catheter Unit of Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa Francisco Gentil, from 2012 to 2015. RESULTS: Three thousand five hundred and seventy-two procedures were recorded. From 2728 CICC placements, 1187 (43.5%) were done using USG. The majority of CICC placements were successful without immediate complications (96.1%). In 55 cases (4.6%), more than three attempts were necessary to puncture the vein. Pneumothorax occurred in 5 cases (0.4%) and arterial puncture was registered in 41 cases (3.5%). An increasing use of USG for placing CICCs was planned and observed over the years and, in the last year of the study, 67.3% of the CICC placements were with USG. CONCLUSIONS: CICC placement with USG is a safe and effective technique. Despite some resistance that is observed, these results support that it is worth following the guidelines that advocate the use of the USG in the placement of CICC.


Subject(s)
Anatomic Landmarks , Catheterization, Central Venous/standards , Medical Oncology/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Ultrasonography, Interventional/standards , Adult , Aged , Catheterization, Central Venous/adverse effects , Clinical Competence , Databases, Factual , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Portugal , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...