Fertility preservation in female cancer patients in Brazil: perceptions and attitudes of infertility specialists.

Objective: Fertility preservation is a priority in oncology for female cancer patients. However, there is a lack of communication between infertility specialists and oncologists. This study aimed to evaluate infertility specialists' perceptions and experiences regarding fertility preservation. Methods: Conduct an online survey to profile infertility specialists. Participants were infertility affiliated with the Brazilian Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Associations (FEBRASGO). The specialists received an online survey, which response rate were 30.9%, most of whom were in southern and southeastern. The survey consisted on 14 questions about the infertility specialists' location, techniques in clinical practice, treatment successful rate, patients idea, etc. Results: The average experience in human reproduction were 15.5 ± 10.2 years (mean ± standard deviation, range 1-40). Among reproductive-aged female cancer patients recommended for fertility preservation, 60.3 ± 28.8% (range 10-100%) underwent preservation procedures. Main barriers were cost (41%), oncologists' knowledge or acceptance (35%) and accessibility (9%). Most infertility specialists (58%) considered 40 years the limit for fertility preservation. Leukemia, lymphoma, breast and ovarian cancers were prioritized for fertility preservation, while lung, thyroid, gastric, and brain cancers were less relevant. Conclusion: This is the first Brazilian study about infertility specialists' perceptions on oncology patients access to fertility preservation. These patients primarily receive treatment in the public health system, while infertility specialists mainly work in the private healthcare. This healthcare mode is currently fragmented, but integrating these experts is enhancing patient access to fertility preservation. Studies on this topic are still warranted.

Breaking Bad News in Obstetrics and Gynecology: We Must Talk About It.

Breaking bad news is common in obstetrics and gynecology (ob-gyn). However, it is difficult, and few doctors receive training on how to deal with this situation. This narrative review aims to gather, analyze, and synthesize part of the knowledge on the area, focused on Ob-Gyn. Among the 16 selected articles, two are randomized controlled intervention studies, and most studies refer to obstetrics. The results found by us pointed out that simulation, feedback/debriefing, lectures, and protocols could improve doctors' performance in communicating bad news. For patients, the context and how the information is transmitted seem to impact more than the content of the news. Ob-Gyn doctors could benefit from specific protocols and education, given the specialty's particularities. There is a lack of evidence about the most effective way to conduct such training. Finding validated ways to quantify and classify studies' results in the area, which would allow for the objective analysis of outcomes, is one of the biggest challenges concerning this topic.

Dar más notícias é comum em obstetrícia e ginecologia. Porém, é difícil e poucos médicos recebem treinamento sobre como lidar com essa situação. Esta revisão narrativa tem como objetivo reunir, analisar e sintetizar parte do conhecimento sobre a área, com foco na obstetrícia. Dentre os 16 artigos selecionados, dois são estudos de intervenção randomizados e controlados, e a maioria dos estudos refere-se à obstetrícia. Os resultados encontrados ressaltaram que simulação, feedback/entrevistas, palestras e protocolos podem melhorar o desempenho dos médicos na comunicação de más notícias. Para os pacientes, o contexto e como as informações são transmitidas parecem ter maior impacto do que o conteúdo das notícias. Os obstetras e ginecologistas poderiam se beneficiar de cursos e protocolos específicos, dadas as particularidades da especialidade. Faltam evidências sobre a forma mais eficaz de realizar esse treinamento. Encontrar formas validadas de quantificar e classificar os resultados dos estudos na área, permitindo uma análise objetiva dos resultados, é um dos maiores desafios neste tema.

Autonomic and cardiovascular consequences resulting from experimental hemorrhagic stroke in the left or right intermediate insular cortex in rats.

Damage to the insular cortex (IC) results in serious cardiovascular consequences and evidence indicates that the characteristics are lateralized. However, a study comparing the effects of focal experimental hemorrhage between IC sides was never performed. We compared the cardiovascular, autonomic and cardiac changes produced by focal experimental hemorrhage (ICH) into the left (L) or right (R) IC. Wistar rats were submitted to microinjection of autologous blood (ICH) or saline (n = 6 each side/group) into the R or L IC. Blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR) and renal sympathetic activity (RSNA) were recorded. Measurements of calcium transient and sarcoplasmic Ca2+ ATPase expression in cardiomyocytes were performed. ICH increased baseline HR (Δ:L-ICH 452 ± 13 vs saline 407 ± 11 bpm; R-ICH 450 ± 7 vs saline 406 ± 8 bpm, P < 0.05) without changing BP. HR was restored to baseline levels after i.v. atenolol. Strikingly, ICH rats presented a reduced baseline RSNA (Δ:L-ICH 122 ± 4 vs saline 148 ± 11 spikes/s; R-ICH 112 ± 5 vs saline 148 ± 7 spikes/s, P < 0.05). After 24 h of ICH we observed a marked increase in cardiac ectopies and this number was greater after ICH R-IC. Heart weight, calcium amplitude and SERCA expression were reduced only in ICH R-IC. Focal stroke into IC can alter the cardiac and renal autonomic control. Damage to the R-IC produces a greater number of arrhythmias and changes in calcium dynamics in cardiac cells indicating that the cardiovascular consequences are hemisphere-dependent. These findings confirm asymmetry for cardiac autonomic control at the IC and help to understand the cardiac and renal implications observed after specific side cortical damage.