ABSTRACT
Introduction: Giant cell lesions of orofacial region although rare in presentation, have diagnostic and treatment challenges due to overlapping clinical, radiological, and histopathological signs. Background: We happened to come across a case, which presented to us with an aggressive jaw lesion of nonodontogenic origin, mimicking a malignancy and putting us in a conundrum with regard to work up and treatment. The sequential work up not only helped us reach a definitive diagnosis but also led us the draw algorithms for diagnosis of Giant cell lesions and management of Central giant cell granuloma. Conclusion: Meticulous planning along with molecular studies helps in better delineating one giant cell lesion from other.
ABSTRACT
Objective: To find a proper method to assess colistin resistance in multidrug resistant Gram negative bacteria (MDR-GNB) on a routine basis in resource limited settings. Methods: Clinical samples were processed. MDR-GNB were identified and were examined for colistin resistance by colistin broth elution method, colistin agar method, and colistin disk elution screening method. Broth microdilution method was used the gold standard. Results: A total of 10 235 clinical samples were processed, in which 857 (8.4%) MDR-GNB were identified. The very significant errors, categorical agreement, major errors, positive predictive values, negative predictive values, specificity and sensitivity of all the phenotypic methods were 5.5%, 0%, 94.4%, 100%, 99.6%, 100% and 94.4%, respectively for the detection of colistin resistance. The colistin elution screening method was cheap and easy to perform with similar results to broth microdilution method. Conclusions: All the evaluation methods for colistin resistance showed similar results. So the laboratories can choose any method for detection of colistin resistance. However, we recommend colistin disk elution screening method because, it is easy and cheap and can be performed in limited resources.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted health-care systems, leading to concerns about its subsequent impact on non-COVID disease conditions. The diagnosis and management of cancer is time sensitive and is likely to be substantially affected by these disruptions. We aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care in India. METHODS: We did an ambidirectional cohort study at 41 cancer centres across India that were members of the National Cancer Grid of India to compare provision of oncology services between March 1 and May 31, 2020, with the same time period in 2019. We collected data on new patient registrations, number of patients visiting outpatient clinics, hospital admissions, day care admissions for chemotherapy, minor and major surgeries, patients accessing radiotherapy, diagnostic tests done (pathology reports, CT scans, MRI scans), and palliative care referrals. We also obtained estimates from participating centres on cancer screening, research, and educational activities (teaching of postgraduate students and trainees). We calculated proportional reductions in the provision of oncology services in 2020, compared with 2019. FINDINGS: Between March 1 and May 31, 2020, the number of new patients registered decreased from 112 270 to 51 760 (54% reduction), patients who had follow-up visits decreased from 634 745 to 340 984 (46% reduction), hospital admissions decreased from 88 801 to 56 885 (36% reduction), outpatient chemotherapy decreased from 173634 to 109 107 (37% reduction), the number of major surgeries decreased from 17 120 to 8677 (49% reduction), minor surgeries from 18 004 to 8630 (52% reduction), patients accessing radiotherapy from 51 142 to 39 365 (23% reduction), pathological diagnostic tests from 398 373 to 246 616 (38% reduction), number of radiological diagnostic tests from 93 449 to 53 560 (43% reduction), and palliative care referrals from 19 474 to 13 890 (29% reduction). These reductions were even more marked between April and May, 2020. Cancer screening was stopped completely or was functioning at less than 25% of usual capacity at more than 70% of centres during these months. Reductions in the provision of oncology services were higher for centres in tier 1 cities (larger cities) than tier 2 and 3 cities (smaller cities). INTERPRETATION: The COVID-19 pandemic has had considerable impact on the delivery of oncology services in India. The long-term impact of cessation of cancer screening and delayed hospital visits on cancer stage migration and outcomes are likely to be substantial. FUNDING: None. TRANSLATION: For the Hindi translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.
