Πέμπτη 17 Μαρτίου 2022

Nipple delay prior to nipple-sparing mastectomy: the protective effect on nipple-areola complex ischaemia

xlomafota13 shared this article with you from Inoreader

J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2022 Feb 19:S1748-6815(22)00074-2. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2022.02.005. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has become increasingly popular over the past decade, offering perceived superior cosmetic outcomes and psychological benefits. The main concern in NSM is that of nipple-areola complex (NAC) ischaemia, occurring in up to 15% of cases. We investigate the utility of nipple delay (ND) in protecting the NAC from ischaemic complications.

METHODS: A retrospective study of all NSM for a single surgeon from 2010 to 2020 was performed, with those not receiving a prior ND procedure included as a control arm. Variables were recorded, including time to mastectomy from delay, degree of breast ptosis, cup size, mastectomy weight, previous radiotherapy, and presence of ischaemic risk factors. Outcomes recorded were the development of NAC ischaemia, graded from epidermolysi s to partial or full-thickness necrosis (FTN).

RESULTS: A total of 62 women for a total of 84 breasts were part of the delay cohort. Ten (12%) breasts in the delay group developed ischaemic complications, with only five breasts developing FTN requiring debridement. Moreover, 33 women for a total of 43 breasts were part of the non-delay cohort. A total of 14 (33%) breasts in the non-delay cohort developed ischaemic complications, with six breasts developing FTN requiring debridement. Delay was protective against ischaemic complications with an OR 0.28 (p=0.007). Mastectomy weight of >600 g and >400 g predicted the development of ischaemic complications in the delay and non-delay cohorts, respectively.

CONCLUSION: ND was shown to protect against the development of ischaemic complications prior to NSM, with the greatest protective effects shown in those with morphologically large breasts.

PMID:35296381 | DOI:10.1016/j.bjps.2022.02.005

View on the web

Voice Handicap Index Changes After Microflap Surgery for Benign Vocal Fold Lesions Are Not Associated With Recommended Absolute Voice Rest Duration

xlomafota13 shared this article with you from Inoreader
Via Polyps

Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2022 Mar 10;31(2):912-922. doi: 10.1044/2021_AJSLP-21-00115. Epub 2022 Feb 18.

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Voice rest is frequently prescribed after phonosurgery, but optimal type and duration for voice outcomes have not been demonstrated. Studies to date have been characterized by heterogeneity in surgical procedures and laryngeal diagnoses. We sought to analyze the effect of recommended absolute voice rest duration on outcomes of microflap surgery for benign vocal fold lesions. A secondary purpose was to identify patient factors associated with postoperative voice outcomes.

METHOD: Forty-three patients were included in this retrospective review of patients aged 18 years and above who underwent direct microlaryngoscopy with microflap for vocal fold polyp or cyst over a 5-year period at a multidisciplinary voice center. Duration of recommended postoperative absolute voice rest was classified as less than 7 days, 7 days, a nd more than 7 days. Demographic and vocal hygiene data and voice treatment history were collected. Outcome measures consisted of one pre- and two postoperative Voice Handicap Index (VHI) scores. Effects of recommended voice rest on outcomes were analyzed using mixed models for repeated measures. Effects of patient factors on outcomes were analyzed as exploratory measures. Stroboscopy ratings were analyzed descriptively.

RESULTS: Thirteen patients were recommended 7 days of absolute voice rest, 15 were recommended less than 7 days, and 15 were recommended more than 7 days. Postoperatively, VHI scores significantly improved for all patients. Voice rest as a continuous variable was associated with the Functional subscale score in the short term, but there was no effect on VHI total score and no longer term effect of voice rest on any outcome. Age, sex, and preoperative voice therapy were associated with at least one VHI subscale score on at least one time point.

CONCLUSION : VHI outcomes of microflap surgery for polyps and cysts do not differ by duration of recommended absolute postoperative voice rest.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.19178459.

PMID:35179998 | DOI:10.1044/2021_AJSLP-21-00115

View on the web

Sulopenem: An Intravenous and Oral Penem for the Treatment of Urinary Tract Infections Due to Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria

xlomafota.13 shared this article with you from Inoreader

40265.jpg

Abstract

Sulopenem (formerly known as CP-70,429, and CP-65,207 when a component of a racemic mixture with its R isomer) is an intravenous and oral penem that possesses in vitro activity against fluoroquinolone-resistant, extended spectrum β-lactamases (ESBL)-producing, multidrug-resistant (MDR) Enterobacterales. Sulopenem is being developed to treat patients with uncomplicated and complicated urinary tract infections (UTIs) as well as intra-abdominal infections. This review will focus mainly on its use in UTIs. The chemical structure of sulopenem shares properties of penicillins, cephalosporins, and carbapenems. Sulopenem is available as an oral prodrug formulation, sulopenem etzadroxil, which is hydrolyzed by intestinal esterases, resulting in active sulopenem. In early studies, the S isomer of CP-65,207, later developed as sulopenem, demonstrated greater absorption, higher drug concentrations in the urine, and increased stability against the renal enzyme dehydropeptidase-1 compared with the R isomer, which set the stage for its further development as a UTI antimicrobial. Sulopenem is active against both Gram-negative and Gram-positive microorganisms. Sulopenem's β-lactam ring alkylates the serine residues of penicillin-binding protein (PBP), which inhibits peptidoglycan cross-linking. Due to its ionization and low molecular weight, sulopenem passes through outer membrane proteins to reach PBPs of Gram-negative bacteria. While sulopenem activity is unaffected by many β-lactamases, resistance arises from alterations in PBPs (e.g., methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus [MRSA]), expression of carbapenemases (e.g., carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales and in Stenotrophomonas maltophilia), reduction in the expression of outer membrane proteins (e.g., some Klebsiella spp.), and the presence of efflux pumps (e.g., MexAB-OprM in Pseudomonas aeruginosa), or a com bination of these mechanisms. In vitro studies have reported that sulopenem demonstrates greater activity than meropenem and ertapenem against Enterococcus faecalis, Listeria monocytogenes, methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA), and Staphylococcus epidermidis, as well as similar activity to carbapenems against Streptococcus agalactiae, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and Streptococcus pyogenes. With some exceptions, sulopenem activity against Gram-negative aerobes was less than ertapenem and meropenem but greater than imipenem. Sulopenem activity against Escherichia coli carrying ESBL, CTX-M, or Amp-C enzymes, or demonstrating MDR phenotypes, as well as against ESBL-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae, was nearly identical to ertapenem and meropenem and greater than imipenem. Sulopenem exhibited identical or slightly greater activity than imipenem against many Gram-positive and Gram-negative anaerobes, including Ba cteroides fragilis. The pharmacokinetics of intravenous sulopenem appear similar to carbapenems such as imipenem-cilastatin, meropenem, and doripenem. In healthy subjects, reported volumes of distribution (Vd) ranged from 15.8 to 27.6 L, total drug clearances (CLT) of 18.9–24.9 L/h, protein binding of approximately 10%, and elimination half-lives (t½) of 0.88–1.03 h. The estimated renal clearance (CLR) of sulopenem is 8.0–10.6 L/h, with 35.5% ± 6.7% of a 1000 mg dose recovered unchanged in the urine. An ester prodrug, sulopenem etzadroxil, has been developed for oral administration. Initial investigations reported a variable oral bioavailability of 20–34% under fasted conditions, however subsequent work showed that bioavailability is significantly improved by administering sulopenem with food to increase its oral absorption or with probenecid to reduce its renal tubular secreti on. Food consumption increases the area under the curve (AUC) of oral sulopenem (500 mg twice daily) by 23.6% when administered alone and 62% when administered with 500 mg of probenecid. Like carbapenems, sulopenem demonstrates bactericidal activity that is associated with the percentage of time that free concentrations exceed the MIC (%f T > MIC). In animal models, bacteriostasis was associated with %f T > MICs ranging from 8.6 to 17%, whereas 2-log10 kill was seen at values ranging from 12 to 28%. No pharmacodynamic targets have been documented for suppression of resistance. Sulopenem concentrations in urine are variable, ranging from 21.8 to 420.0 mg/L (median 84.4 mg/L) in fasted subjects and 28.8 to 609.0 mg/L (median 87.3 mg/L) in those who were fed. Sulopenem has been compared with carbapenems and cephalosporins in guinea pig and murine systemic and lung infection animal models. Studied pathogens included Acin etobacter calcoaceticus, B. fragilis, Citrobacter freundii, Enterobacter cloacae, E. coli, K. pneumoniae, Proteus vulgaris, and Serratia marcescens. These studies reported that overall, sulopenem was non-inferior to carbapenems but appeared to be superior to cephalosporins. A phase III clinical trial (SURE-1) reported that sulopenem was not non-inferior to ciprofloxacin in women infected with fluoroquinolone-susceptible pathogens, due to a higher rate of asymptomatic bacteriuria in sulopenem-treated patients at the test-of-cure visit. However, the researchers reported superiority of sulopenem etzadroxil/probenecid over ciprofloxacin for the treatment of uncomplicated UTIs in women infected with fluoroquinolone/non-susceptible pathogens, and non-inferiority in all patients with a positive urine culture. A phase III clinical trial (SURE-2) compared intravenous sulopenem followed by oral sulopenem etzadroxil/probenecid with ertapenem in the treatment of complicated UTIs. No difference in overall success was noted at the end of therapy. However, intravenous sulopenem followed by oral sulopenem etzadroxil was not non-inferior to ertapenem followed by oral stepdown therapy in overall success at test-of-cure due to a higher rate of asymptomatic bacteriuria in the sulopenem arm. After a meeting with the US FDA, Iterum stated that they are currently evaluating the optimal design for an additional phase III uncomplicated UTI study to be conducted prior to the potential resubmission of the New Drug Application (NDA). It is unclear at this time whether Iterum intends to apply for EMA or Japanese regulatory approval. The safety and tolerability of sulopenem has been reported in various phase I pharmacokinetic studies and phase III clinical trials. Sulopenem (intravenous and oral) appears to be well tolerated in healthy subjects, with and without the coadministration of probenecid, with few serious drug-rel ated treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) reported to date. Reported TEAEs affecting ≥1% of patients were (from most to least common) diarrhea, nausea, headache, vomiting and dizziness. Discontinuation rates were low and were not different than comparator agents. Sulopenem administered orally and/or intravenously represents a potentially well tolerated and effective option for treating uncomplicated and complicated UTIs, especially in patients with documented or highly suspected antimicrobial pathogens to commonly used agents (e.g. fluoroquinolone-resistant E. coli), and in patients with documented microbiological or clinical failure or patients who demonstrate intolerance/adverse effects to first-line agents. This agent will likely be used orally in the outpatient setting, and intravenously followed by oral stepdown in the hospital setting. Sulopenem also allows for oral stepdown therapy in the hospital setting from intravenous non-sulopenem therapy. More clinical d ata are required to fully assess the clinical efficacy and safety of sulopenem, especially in patients with complicated UTIs caused by resistant pathogens such as ESBL-producing, Amp-C, MDR E. coli. Antimicrobial stewardship programs will need to create guidelines for when this oral and intravenous penem should be used.

View on the web

Mycobacterium avium and Mycobacterium intracellulare in potable water in the USA

xlomafota.13 shared this article with you from Inoreader

Abstract

Nontuberculous mycobacterium (NTM) infections are increasing in the USA and have a high cost burden associated with treatment. Thus, it is necessary to understand what changes could be contributing to this increase in NTM disease rate. Water samples from 40 sites were collected from around the USA. They represented three water types: groundwater disinfected with chlorine and surface water disinfected with chlorine or monochloramine. Two methods, culture and qPCR, were used to measure M. avium and M. intracellulare. Heterotrophic bacteria and NTM counts were also measured. M. avium and M. intracellulare were molecularly detected in 25% (73/292) and 35% (102/292) of samples. The mean concentrations of M. avium and M. intracellulare were 2.8 × 103 and 4.0 × 103 genomic units (GU) L−1. The Northeast sites had the highest sample positively rate for both M. avium and M. intracellulare. The highest NTM counts and M. avium concentrations were observed in the surface water treated with chloramine. Geographic location and source water/disinfectant type were observed to significantly influence M. avium and M. intracellulare occurrence rates. These studies can help improve public health risk management by balancing disinfectant treatments and diverse microbial loads in drinking water.

Key points

• M. avium (MA) culture rate increased significantly: 1% (1999) to 13%.

• Culture versus qPCR method: 13% vs 31% for MA and 6% vs 35% for MI.

• The results of each method type tell two different stories of MA and MI occurrence.

Graphical abstract

View on the web

Propensity Score Analysis of Outcomes Following Laparoscopic or Open Radical Resection for Gallbladder Cancer in T2 and T3 Stages

xlomafota.13 shared this article with you from Inoreader

Abstract

Background

Although laparoscopic radical resection (LRR) has long been contraindicated in gallbladder cancer (GBC), recent studies have demonstrated laparoscopic surgery did not adversely affect the perioperative and survival outcomes of GBC patients. However, these literatures are mainly focused on GBC of relatively early stages or incidental GBC. This study aimed to investigate the perioperative and long-term outcomes of LRR versus open radical resection (ORR) for GBCs in T2 and T3 stages.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted on 99 patients with GBC of T2 and T3 stages who underwent radical resection at Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital from January 2010 to December 2020. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM), which is widely used to reduce selection bias, was performed to compare the surgical outcomes and long-term prognosis between LRR and ORR. A logistic regression analysis was implemented to identify the predictive risk factors of postoperative overall survival.

Results

By using PSM, the baseline characteristics of two groups (with 30 patients in each group) were generally well balanced. In the LRR group, the length of operation was significantly longer than the ORR group, but the intraoperative bleeding and postoperative days of hospital stay were significantly decreased compared to the ORR group. The two groups showed comparable outcomes regarding the incidence of biliary reconstruction, lymph node yield, the incidence of postoperative morbidities, the incidence of Clavien–Dindo (C–D) grades III–IV, the days of drainage tubes indwelling, mortality at 30 postoperative days and 90 postoperative days, and the incidence of port-site metastasis. The 1-, 2-, and 3-year overall survival rates were 61.2, 40.1, and 30.1%, respectively, in the LRR group, and 53.3, 40.1, and 40.1%, respectively, in the OLR group (P = 0.644). On multivariate analysis, T stage, vascular invasion, and tumor differentiation were found to be the independent risk factors for overall survival of GBC in T2 and T3 stages.

Conclusions

For GBC in T2 and T3 stages, LRR can achieve comparable perioperative outcomes and similar long-term survival benefit compared to ORR. LRR tends to show advantages over ORR regarding intraoperative bleeding and postoperative days of hospital stay.

View on the web

Pancreatico-Jejunostomy On Isolated Loop After Pancreatico-Duodenectomy: Is It Worthwhile?

xlomafota.13 shared this article with you from Inoreader

Abstract

Background

Postoperative morbidity remains a significant problem after pancreatico-duodenectomy. The management of pancreatic stump continues to be a challenge, and many technical solutions have been developed over the years. In this study, we report the results obtained with the use of an isolated loop for pancreatico-jejunostomy in patients with soft pancreas and small pancreatic duct diameter.

Methods

Clinical data of patients submitted to pancreatico-duodenectomy in a period of sixteen years (2005–2020) were extracted from a prospective database. Patients with soft pancreas, main duct diameter < 2 mm and reconstruction by pancreatico-jejunostomy on single loop or isolated loop were selected. Primary end-point was the incidence of clinically relevant fistulas in the two groups of patients. Secondary endpoint was the length of postoperative hospital stay. A propensity score matching analysis was used for the statistics.

Results

Two hundred and twenty-one patients with the above characteristics were found in the database. One hundred and twelve of these received a single-loop reconstruction and 109 an isolated loop reconstruction. Incidence of clinically relevant fistulas was higher in the first group (41% vs 27%; p = 0.023). Postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the second group (21 days vs 15; p < 0.001). These results were confirmed at the propensity score matching.

Conclusion

In patients with soft pancreatic texture and small main duct diameter, pancreatico-jejunostomy on isolated loop is associated with a lower incidence of clinically relevant fistulas than after classic reconstruction. The duration of postoperative hospital stay was significantly reduced, with consequent reduction of cost.

View on the web

Pregnancy, Fetal, and Infant Outcomes Following Maternal Exposure to Glatiramer Acetate During Pregnancy and Breastfeeding

xlomafota.13 shared this article with you from Inoreader

40264.jpg

Abstract

Introduction

Published data support the safety of glatiramer acetate in patients with multiple sclerosis who are pregnant or breastfeeding, but long-term data are limited.

Objective

We aimed to assess pregnancy, fetal, and infant outcomes following maternal exposure to glatiramer acetate.

Methods

In-utero glatiramer acetate-exposed postmarketing pregnancy reports from 2019 to 2021 were extracted from Teva's pharmacovigilance database. Pregnancy data acquired prior to knowledge of pregnancy outcome or detection of congenital malformation (prospective reports) were used to estimate pregnancy and infant outcome rates for glatiramer acetate 20- and 40-mg/mL exposure. A subgroup of cases completed follow-up questionnaires and were analyzed separately.

Results

Prospective cases with 702 fetuses had known outcomes with 647 (92.2%) live births, 47 (6.7%) spontaneous abortions, 4 (0.6%) induced abortions, 2 (0.3%) ectopic pregnancies, and 2 (0.3%) fetal deaths. Rates of major congenital malformation (1.1%), preterm births (7.2%), and low/very low birth weight (4.8%), and parameters of growth were within background rates. No infant developmental delay was reported. Overall, pregnancy and infant outcomes were similar across glatiramer acetate doses.

Conclusions

Maternal exposure to glatiramer acetate does not appear to be related to adverse pregnancy, fetal, or infant outcomes. These data further support the safety of both glatiramer acetate 20-mg/mL and 40-mg/mL treatments during pregnancy and breastfeeding.

View on the web

Αρχειοθήκη ιστολογίου