RESUMO
(1) Background: Currently, an increasing number of women postpone pregnancy beyond the age of 35. Gynecological cancers affect a significant proportion of women of reproductive age, necessitating the development of fertility preservation methods to fulfill family planning. Consequently, providing treatment options that preserve fertility in women diagnosed with gynecological cancers has become a crucial component of care for survivors. (2) Methods: We conducted an extensive search of relevant scientific publications in PubMed and Embase databases and performed a narrative review, including high-quality peer-reviewed research on fertility after being treated for gynecologic cancers, reporting pregnancy rates, birth rates, and pregnancy outcomes in cancer survivors as well as therapeutic options which partially preserve fertility and methods for obtaining a pregnancy in survivors. (3) Discussion: The medicine practiced today is focused on both treating the neoplasm and preserving the quality of life of the patients, with fertility preservation being an important element of this quality. This leads to an improved quality of life, allowing these women to become mothers even in the seemingly adverse circumstances posed by such a pathology. However, although there are guidelines on female fertility preservation in the context of neoplasms, an analysis shows that physicians do not routinely consider it and do not discuss these options with their patients. (4) Conclusions: Advancements in medicine have led to a better understanding and management of gynecological neoplasms, resulting in increased survival rates. Once the battle against these neoplasms is won, the issue of preserving the quality of life for these women arises, with fertility preservation being an important aspect for women who have not yet fulfilled their family planning desires at the time of diagnosis. It is important for patients to be informed about the available options for fertility preservation and to be encouraged to make informed decisions in collaboration with their medical team. Standardized recommendations for onco-fertility into guidelines should be taken into consideration in the future.
RESUMO
The increasing prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) requires non-invasive and precise techniques for evaluating the predisposing risk factors such as visceral adipose tissue (VAT) and subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT). According to PRISMA, we developed a systematic review and searched after "visceral adipose tissue AND gestational diabetes" and identified 221 articles on the MEDLINE and Word of Science databases. After assessing them for inclusion criteria and two researchers screened them, 11 relevant articles were included. Although evidence is conflicting, more studies favor using US-determined VAT in GDM prediction. VAT may be more valuable than body mass index or SAT in predicting GDM. VAT can represent an additive factor to the prediction tool of the risk of developing GDM when used in conjunction with other anthropometric or biological parameters or maternal risk factors. US measurements are heterogeneous given different evaluation techniques, cut-off values and inter-operator variation. A significant limitation is the lack of a gold standard to identify GDM confidently. Pregnant women may benefit from early monitoring and preventive care if classified as high risk for GDM early in the gestational period. US-measured VAT during the first trimester of pregnancy seems a valuable and inexpensive screening approach to predict GDM development later in pregnancy, either by itself or if used in conjunction with other clinical and biological parameters.
RESUMO
Background and objectives. In colorectal cancers, the embryologic origin of the primary tumor determines important molecular dissimilarities between right-sided (RS) and left-sided (LS) carcinomas. Although important prognostic differences have been revealed between RS- and LS-patients with resected colorectal liver metastases (CLMs), it is still unclear if this observation depends on the RAS mutational status. To refine the impact of primary tumor location (PTL) on the long-term outcomes of patients with resected CLMs, the rates of overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival (RFS) and survival after recurrence (SAR) were compared between RS- vs. LS-patients, according to their RAS status. Material and Methods. All patients with known RAS status, operated until December 2019, were selected from a prospectively maintained database, including all patients who underwent hepatectomy for histologically-proven CLMs. A log-rank test was used to compare survival rates between the RS- vs. LS-group, in RAS-mut and RAS-wt patients, respectively. A multivariate analysis was performed to assess if PTL was independently associated with OS, RFS or SAR. Results. In 53 patients with RAS-mut CLMs, the OS, RFS and SAR rates were not significantly different (p = 0.753, 0.945 and 0.973, respectively) between the RS and LS group. In 89 patients with RAS-wt CLMs, the OS and SAR rates were significantly higher (p = 0.007 and 0.001, respectively) in the LS group vs. RS group, while RFS rates were similar (p = 0.438). The multivariate analysis performed in RAS-wt patients revealed that RS primary (p = 0.009), extrahepatic metastases (p = 0.001), N-positive (p = 0.014), age higher than 65 (p = 0.002) and preoperative chemotherapy (p = 0.004) were independently associated with worse OS, while RS location (p < 0.001) and N-positive (p = 0.007) were independent prognostic factors for poor SAR. Conclusions. After resection of CLMs, PTL had no impact on long-term outcomes in RAS-mut patients, while in RAS-wt patients, the RS primary was independently associated with worse OS and SAR.
