Bevacizumab-loaded polyurethane subconjunctival implants: effects on experimental glaucoma filtration surgery.

PURPOSE: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) may contribute to the scarring process resulting from glaucoma filtration surgery, since this cytokine may stimulate fibroblast proliferation. The aim of this study was to describe a new bevacizumab-loaded polyurethane implant (BPUI) and to evaluate its effectiveness as a new drug delivery system of anti-VEGF antibody in a rabbit model of glaucoma filtration surgery. METHODS: An aqueous dispersion of polyurethane was obtained via the conventional process. Bevacizumab (1.5 mg) was then incorporated into the dispersion and was subsequently dried to form the polymeric films. Films with dimensions of 3×3×1 mm that either did (group BPUI, n=10) or did not contain bevacizumab (group PUI, n=10) were implanted in the subconjunctival space, at the surgical site in 1 eye of each rabbit. The in vitro bevacizumab release was evaluated using size-exclusion high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), and the in vivo effects of the drug were investigated in a rabbit experimental trabeculectomy model by examining the bleb characteristics and collagen accumulation, and by performing immunohistological analyses of VEGF expression. RESULTS: HPLC showed that only 10% of the bevacizumab in the implants had been released by postoperative day 5. In vivo studies demonstrated that the drug had no adverse effects; however, no significant differences in either the bleb area score or the collagen deposit intensity between the group PUI and the group that BPUI were observed. Moreover, the group BPUI presented a significantly lower proportion of VEGF-expressing fibroblasts than group PUI (0.17±0.03 vs. 0.35±0.05 cells/field, P=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that bevacizumab release from the BPUIs only occurred for a short time probably from the surface of the films. Nevertheless, they were well tolerated in rabbit eyes and reduced the number of VEGF-expressing fibroblasts.

Valorização por pós-graduandos dos papéis do professor de ciências da saúde / Valuation by graduated students of the roles of the health sciences teacher

Introdução: No passado, idealmente, o Professor de Ciências da Saúde deveria ser conferencista exímio e ter grande competência profissional. Atualmente, os papéis de um “bom professor” são mais amplos. O estudo foi desenvolvido com o objetivo de verificar se este novo conceito está disseminado entre pós-graduandos, coletando suas opiniões sobre o valor de múltiplos papéis. Método: Opiniões de 92 pós-graduandos foram colhidas por meio de questionário, autoadministrado, contendo 13 itens relacionados com as principais atribuições do Professor de Ciências da Saúde: administrador institucional; avaliador de alunos; avaliador de cursos; captador de recursos materiais externos, para a instituição; gerador de novos conhecimentos; membro ativo da estrutura universitária; modelo de atitudes, valores e crenças; planejador de cursos/currículos; produtor de material didático; profissional hábil e competente; provedor de informações na prática médica; provedor de informações para o aluno em aulas formais; tutor/facilitador. As respostas foram registradas em escala Likert de 5 pontos, sendo o ponto 1 correspondente a “sem importância” e o ponto 5 a “muito importante”. Resultados: O papel mais valorizado foi o de “gerador de novos conhecimentos”, seguido dos papéis de “avaliador de alunos” e de “provedor de informações em aulas formais”. E os menos valorizados foram: “tutor”, “modelo de atitudes valores e crenças” e “captador de recursos para a instituição”. Conclusão: Os resultados indicam que há necessidade de inclusão, nos Programas de Pós-Graduação, de maior número de atividades formativas que ampliem a visão dos mestrandos e doutorandos sobre os múltiplos papéis do moderno professor de ciências da saúde.

Background: In the past, the Professor of Health Sciences was ideally supposed to be a distinguished lecturer with high professional competence. Today, the roles of a “good teacher” have expanded. The objective of the present study was to determine whether this new concept is disseminated among postgraduate students, whose opinions about the values of multiple roles were surveyed. Method: The opinions of 92 postgraduate students were collected with a self-administered questionnaire containing 13 items related to the major attributions of a Professor of Health Sciences: institutional administrator; evaluator of students; evaluator of courses; fund raiser for external financial resources, for the institution; generator of new knowledge; active member of the university structure; role model for actions, values and beliefs; planner of courses/syllabi; producer of teaching material; skilled and competent professional; provider of information in medical practice; provider of information for the students in formal classes; tutor/facilitator. The replies were scored on a 5-point Likert scale, with point 1 corresponding to “not important” and point 5 to “very important”. Results: The most valued role was that of “generator of new knowledge”, followed by “evaluator of students” and “provider of information in formal classes’. And the least valued roles were: “tutor”, “role model for attitudes, values and beliefs”, and “fund raiser for external financial resources, for the institution”. Conclusion: The results indicate the need to include a larger number of educational activities in order to expand the view of Masters and Doctoral students regarding the multiple roles of modern Professors of Health Sciences.