Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Diagnostics (Basel) ; 13(8)2023 Apr 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37189474

ABSTRACT

Prostate cancer is among the most frequently diagnosed cancers and a leading cause of cancer-related death in men. Currently, the most reliable and widely used imaging test for prostate cancer diagnosis is multiparametric pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI). Modern biopsy techniques are based on the computerised merging of ultrasound and MRI images to provide better vision during the biopsy procedure (Fusion Biopsy). However, the method is expensive due to high equipment cost. Cognitive fusion of ultrasound and MRI images has recently emerged as a cheaper and easier alternative to computerised fusion. The aim of this prospective study is to perform an in-patient comparison of the systematic prostate biopsy procedure (SB) vs. cognitive fusion (CF) guided prostate biopsy method in terms of safety, ease of use, cancer detection rate and clinically significant cancer detection. We enrolled 103 patients with suspected prostate cancer that were biopsy naive, with PSA > 4 ng/dL and PIRADS score of 3, 4 or 5. All patients received a transperineal standard 12-18 cores systematic biopsy (SB) and a four-cores targeted cognitive fusion (CF) biopsy. Following the prostate biopsy, 68% of the patients were diagnosed with prostate cancer (70/103 patients). SB diagnosis rate was 62% while CF biopsy was slightly better with a 66% rate. There was a significant 20% increase in clinically significant prostate cancer detection rate for the CF compared to SB (p < 0.05) and a significant prostate cancer risk upgrade from the low to the intermediate risk category (13%, p = 0.041). Transperineal cognitive fusion targeted prostate biopsy is a straightforward biopsy method that is easy to perform and is a safe alternative to standard systematic biopsy with improved significant cancer detection accuracy. A combined targeted and systematic approach should be used for the best diagnostic results.

2.
J Pers Med ; 11(1)2020 Dec 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33374939

ABSTRACT

The 2016 Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines define sepsis as life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. This study had the objective of assessing the efficacy of presepsin in the prognosis of sepsis. This was a single-center prospective study, performed in Craiova Emergency Hospital, that included 114 patients admitted in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) department between 2018 and 2019 fulfilling the sepsis criteria. Including criteria were: age ≥ 18, sepsis diagnosed by the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score of pulmonary, abdominal, urinary, surgical or unknown origin, as well as lactate levels ≥ 2 mmol/l and need of vasopressors for mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≥ 65 mmHg, despite adequate volume resuscitations for patients with septic shock. Patients younger than 18, pregnant, immunocompromised, or with terminal illnesses were excluded. Based on disease severity, patients were distributed into two study groups: sepsis-76 patients and septic shock-38 patients. As expected, SOFA score and most of its components (PaO2/FiO2, platelets, and Glasgow Coma Score (GCS)) were significantly modified for patients with septic shock compared to those in the sepsis group and for survivors versus non-survivors. Overall death rate was 34.2%, with a significantly higher value for patients with septic shock (55.3% vs. 23.7%, p = 0.035). Sepsis marker presepsin was significantly elevated in all patients (2047 ng/mL) and significantly increased for the septic shock patients (2538 ng/mL, p < 0.001) and non-survivors (3138 ng/mL, p < 0.001). A significant correlation was identified between the SOFA score and presepsin (r = 0.883, p < 0.001). The receiver operating characteristics (ROC)-Area Under Curve (AUC) analysis showed significant prognostic values for presepsin regarding both sepsis severity (AUC = 0.726, 95% confidence interval CI = 0.635-0.806) and mortality risk (AUC = 0.861, 95%CI = 0.784-0.919). In conclusion, under the revised definition of sepsis, presepsin could be a useful marker for prognosis of sepsis severity and mortality risk. Additional data are required to confirm the value of presepsin in sepsis prognosis.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...