Mesothelioma in a developing country: a retrospective analysis of the diagnostic process.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the process of diagnosing patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) at a tertiary care hospital. METHODS: This was a retrospective study involving patients referred to a tertiary-care cancer center in Brazil between 2009 and 2020. The diagnostic process was divided into four steps: onset of symptoms, referral to a specialist visit, histopathological diagnosis, and beginning of treatment. The intervals between each phase and the factors for delays were evaluated. Data including clinical status, radiological examinations, staging, treatment modalities, and survival outcomes were collected. RESULTS: During the study period, 66 patients (mean age = 64 years) were diagnosed with MPM and underwent treatment. Only 27 (41%) of the patients had knowledge of prior exposure to asbestos. The median number of months (IQR) between the onset of symptoms and the first specialist visit, between the specialist visit and histopathological characterization, and between definite diagnosis and beginning of treatment was, respectively, 6.5 (2.0-11.4), 1.5 (0.6-2.1), and 1.7 (1.2-3.4). The knowledge of prior asbestos exposure was associated with a shorter time to referral to a specialist (median: 214 vs. 120 days; p = 0.04). A substantial number of nondiagnostic procedures and false-negative biopsy results (the majority of which involved the use of Cope needle biopsy) were found to be decisive factors for the length of waiting time. The mean overall survival was 11.9 months. CONCLUSIONS: The unfamiliarity of health professionals with MPM and the patient's lack of knowledge of prior asbestos exposure were the major factors to cause a long time interval between the onset of symptoms and beginning of treatment. An overall survival shorter than 1 year is likely to have been due to the aforementioned delays.

Mesothelioma in a developing country: a retrospective analysis of the diagnostic process / Mesotelioma em um país em desenvolvimento: análise retrospectiva do processo diagnóstico

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate the process of diagnosing patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) at a tertiary care hospital. Methods: This was a retrospective study involving patients referred to a tertiary-care cancer center in Brazil between 2009 and 2020. The diagnostic process was divided into four steps: onset of symptoms, referral to a specialist visit, histopathological diagnosis, and beginning of treatment. The intervals between each phase and the factors for delays were evaluated. Data including clinical status, radiological examinations, staging, treatment modalities, and survival outcomes were collected. Results: During the study period, 66 patients (mean age = 64 years) were diagnosed with MPM and underwent treatment. Only 27 (41%) of the patients had knowledge of prior exposure to asbestos. The median number of months (IQR) between the onset of symptoms and the first specialist visit, between the specialist visit and histopathological characterization, and between definite diagnosis and beginning of treatment was, respectively, 6.5 (2.0-11.4), 1.5 (0.6-2.1), and 1.7 (1.2-3.4). The knowledge of prior asbestos exposure was associated with a shorter time to referral to a specialist (median: 214 vs. 120 days; p = 0.04). A substantial number of nondiagnostic procedures and false-negative biopsy results (the majority of which involved the use of Cope needle biopsy) were found to be decisive factors for the length of waiting time. The mean overall survival was 11.9 months. Conclusions: The unfamiliarity of health professionals with MPM and the patient's lack of knowledge of prior asbestos exposure were the major factors to cause a long time interval between the onset of symptoms and beginning of treatment. An overall survival shorter than 1 year is likely to have been due to the aforementioned delays.

RESUMO Objetivo: Avaliar o processo de diagnóstico de pacientes com mesotelioma pleural maligno (MPM) em um hospital terciário. Métodos: Estudo retrospectivo envolvendo pacientes encaminhados a um centro oncológico terciário no Brasil entre 2009 e 2020. O processo diagnóstico foi dividido em quatro etapas: início dos sintomas, encaminhamento para consulta especializada, diagnóstico histopatológico e início do tratamento. Foram avaliados os intervalos entre as etapas e os fatores de atraso. Os dados coletados incluíram estado clínico, exames radiológicos, estadiamento, modalidades de tratamento e resultados de sobrevida. Resultados: Durante o período do estudo, 66 pacientes (média de idade = 64 anos) foram diagnosticados com MPM e submetidos a tratamento. Apenas 27 (41%) dos pacientes tinham conhecimento de exposição prévia ao amianto. A mediana de meses (IIQ) entre o início dos sintomas e a primeira consulta especializada, entre a consulta especializada e a caracterização histopatológica e entre o diagnóstico definitivo e o início do tratamento foi, respectivamente, de 6,5 (2,0-11,4), 1,5 (0,6 -2,1) e 1,7 (1,2-3,4). Conhecimento de exposição prévia ao amianto associou-se a menor tempo para encaminhamento a um especialista (mediana: 214 vs. 120 dias; p = 0,04). O número substancial de procedimentos não diagnósticos e as biópsias falso-negativas (a maioria envolvendo o uso de biópsia com agulha de Cope) foram considerados fatores decisivos para o tempo de espera. A sobrevida global média foi de 11,9 meses. Conclusões: A falta de familiaridade dos profissionais de saúde com o MPM e o desconhecimento dos pacientes em relação à exposição prévia ao amianto foram os principais fatores que ocasionaram um longo intervalo de tempo entre o início dos sintomas e o início do tratamento. A sobrevida global inferior a 1 ano provavelmente se deve aos atrasos supracitados.

Indoor Air Quality and Environmental Sampling as Support Tools to Detect SARS-CoV-2 in the Healthcare Setting.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spread inside the healthcare setting using environmental sampling and indoor air quality (IAQ) parameters. METHODS: Ward/ICU rooms had IAQ parameters monitored in real-time, including volatile organic compounds and particulate matter. Surface and three air samples with different exposure times were collected in each room and tested for SARS-CoV-2 using quantitative Rt-PCR. Environmental sampling and IAQ data were compared to provide information about viral spread. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 6/10 rooms and 9/30 air samples, which is proportionally higher than previous studies. Sampling time confirmed to be crucial to viral detection. No correlations between IAQ parameters could be associated with positive/negative samples even when aerosol-generating procedures were performed. CONCLUSION: Environmental sampling of SARS-CoV-2 RNA may be used as an indicator of occupational safety. IAQ is also a potential tool but requires further research.

Confocal endomicroscopy and robot-assisted bronchoplasty integration to treat an endobronchial tumour.

We present a case of a young man with an endobronchial carcinoid in the left main bronchus, which was treated integrating probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy and fluorescence imaging during a robot-assisted bronchoplasty. This technique allowed precise detection of the neoplastic area, avoiding associated lung resection. The incorporation of new technologies to our current practice may lead to a better approach to airway tumours.

Effectiveness of Spacer Devices on Preventing Undesirable Cardiovascular Effects of Inhaled Salbutamol.

Background: Currently, there are no regulatory guidelines indicating spacer devices/valved holding chamber (VHC) should be used routinely during pulmonary function tests, and few studies evaluated if spacer devices reduce beta-agonist bronchodilators' side effects. Methods: A prospective study compared salbutamol's cardiovascular effects and bronchodilation response during spirometry tests with and without a spacer device/VHC. Heart rate (HR), the corrected QT interval (QTc), and systolic and diastolic blood pressure were measured 10 minutes after the first spirometry test, before the drug administration, and 20 minutes after inhalation in both groups. Spirometric parameters (forced expiratory volume in the first second [FEV1], forced vital capacity [FVC], and FEV1/FVC) were also measured for both groups. Results: HR and QTc increase were significantly higher in the pressurized meter dose inhalers alone group versus the VHC group [mean SD] [73.1 ± 10 bpm to 74.3 + 10 bpm, p = 0.021] and [median (25%-75% interquartile range)] [389 ms (381-404) to 398 ms (387-407), p = 0.045] vs. [mean SD] [75.4 ± 9 to 73.8 + 8 bpm, p = 0.4] and [median (25%-75% interquartile range)] [388 ms (347-408) to 385 ms (366-408), p = 0.35], respectively. FEV1 variation before and after salbutamol were similar between both groups. Discussion: Although VHC significantly reduces HR and QTc variation when using beta-agonist bronchodilators in healthy patients, no clinical repercussions of this variation were found in this study, since no event of tachycardia or pathological QTc was recorded. Conclusion: VHC has a diminished clinical impact for healthy patients when considering cardiovascular effects and spirometric parameters. Beta-agonist bronchodilators may be administrated despite the use of spacer devices in patients without known cardiovascular diseases. Its significance for other populations still needs to be determined.