Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Pancreas ; 50(4): 516-523, 2021 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33939663

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: There is a pressing need to develop clinical management pathways for grade 3 (G3) gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP NEN). METHODS: We performed a retrospective study on patients with metastatic G3 GEP NEN. The relationship between baseline characteristics and progression-free survival and overall survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: We included 142 patients (74 well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors [WDNETs], 68 poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas [PDNECs]). Patients with WDNET had prolonged survival compared with PDNEC (median, 24 vs 15 months, P = 0.0001), which persisted in both pancreatic and nonpancreatic cohorts. Well-differentiated morphology, Ki-67 <50% and positive somatostatin receptor imaging were independently associated with prolonged survival. Of the subgroup treated with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, response rates were favorable (partial response, 47%; stable disease, 30%); there was no significant difference in response rates nor progression-free survival between WDNET and PDNEC despite significantly prolonged overall survival in the WDNET cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Our study corroborates the knowledge of 2 prognostically distinct subgroups within the World Health Organization 2019 G3 GEP NEN population, observed in both pancreatic and nonpancreatic gastrointestinal cohorts. Definitive management pathways are needed to reflect the differences between G3 WDNET and PDNEC.


Subject(s)
Intestinal Neoplasms/pathology , Neuroendocrine Tumors/pathology , Pancreas/pathology , Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology , Stomach Neoplasms/pathology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Intestinal Neoplasms/classification , Intestinal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Ki-67 Antigen/metabolism , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Grading , Neuroendocrine Tumors/classification , Neuroendocrine Tumors/drug therapy , Pancreas/drug effects , Pancreas/metabolism , Pancreatic Neoplasms/classification , Pancreatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Stomach Neoplasms/classification , Stomach Neoplasms/drug therapy , World Health Organization , Young Adult
3.
J Obstet Gynaecol ; 40(7): 1000-1005, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31826680

ABSTRACT

A new development in female genital cosmetic surgery (FGCS) is the promotion of revision surgery for 'botched labiaplasty'. This content analysis study reviews the quality of information offered on websites specifically advertising revision labiaplasty. Twelve websites were identified through online searches and were examined for the quality of their clinical information. All sites defined botched labiaplasty as unsatisfactory appearance after labiaplasty. Four gave no further details and five listed asymmetry, irregular labial edges or removal of too much or too little tissue. Four websites described primary botched labiaplasty as 'mutilation'. Inadequacy of the primary surgeon was cited as the cause of botched labiaplasty in 11/12. Only two websites mentioned risks of surgery. Good outcomes were not defined and no website provided outcome data although guaranteed satisfaction was implied in two websites. This study highlights the existence and promotion of services for botched labiaplasty using non-specific and emotive descriptions. These findings suggest that unsatisfactory results from consumers' perspectives are far from uncommon. The same women whose expectations have not been met by primary surgery are now being targeted for repeat surgery with online advertising capitalising on their unchanged motivations.Impact StatementWhat is already known on this subject? Female genital cosmetic surgery (FGCS) is mainly advertised online with labiaplasty as the most commonly performed procedure. A market for labiaplasty revision to correct 'botched' primary procedures is developing. Academic literature and advertising materials are inconsistent when defining indications and determinants of success for labiaplasty or revision.What the results of this study add? A content analysis of websites specifically advertising revision labiaplasty describes the emotive and nonspecific terms used online to promote revision labiaplasty.What the implications are of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? The existence of services for botched labiaplasty suggests dissatisfaction is common. Women whose expectations have not been met by primary surgery are targeted for repeat surgery through online advertising capitalising on their potentially unchanged motivations. This study demonstrates the need for clearer outcome data for labiaplasty and highlights the need for better advertising standards for FGCS promotion.


Subject(s)
Advertising , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Internet , Plastic Surgery Procedures/adverse effects , Reoperation , Vulva/surgery , Clinical Competence , Female , Humans , Malpractice/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Satisfaction , Surgeons
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...