6 research outputs found
μ§μ₯μΆνλ ₯μ΄ μλ λΉν νμμμμ λμ₯λ΄μκ²½μ μν
λͺ©μ : λΉνμ μμΈμ μ°ΎκΈ° μν΄ μλΆμμ₯κ΄λ΄μκ²½μ λ리 μνλμ΄ μμ§λ§, λμ₯λ΄μκ²½μ μ μ©μ± λ° μν μ λν μ 보λ λΆμ‘±νλ€. λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬μμ μ μλ€μ μ§μ₯μΆνλ ₯μ΄ μλ λΉννμμμ λμ₯λ΄μκ²½ κ²μ¬λ₯Ό ν΅ν λΉνμ μμΈμ λΆμνμ¬ κ·Έ μ μ©μ±μ νμΈν΄ λ³΄κ³ μ νμλ€. λμ λ° λ°©λ²: λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬λ 2001λ
1μλΆν° 2002λ
12μκΉμ§ λΉνμ μμΈμ μ°ΎκΈ° μν΄ λμ₯λ΄μκ²½μ μνν 147λͺ
μ νμλ€μ κΈ°λ‘μ νν₯μ μΌλ‘ μ΄ν΄λ³΄μλ€. κ²°κ³Ό: νμλ€μ νκ· μ°λ Ήμ 48Β±17μΈ(λ²μ 15ο½90)μ΄μμΌλ©°, λ¨λ
λΉκ° 1οΌ4.3μ΄μλ€. 94λͺ
(63.9%)μ΄ μ² κ²°νμ±λΉνμ ν©λΉνμμΌλ©°, 21.8% νμμμ νμμμΉκ° 7.0 g/dL μ΄νμλ€. λμ₯λ΄μκ²½μμ λΉνκ³Ό μ°κ΄λμ΄ λ³΄μ΄λ μ΄μμ견μ 76λͺ
(94μ)μμ λνλ¬μΌλ©°, μΉν΅(35μ), μ©μ’
(31μ), κ²°ν΅(9μ), λμ₯μ(8μ), κ²μ€(8μ), μκΆλ΄λ§μ¦(1μ), νκ΄ μ΄νμ±μ¦(1μ), κΆ€μμ± λμ₯μΌ(1μ)μ μμΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. λμ₯λ΄μκ²½μ λ³λ³μ κ³ λ Ήκ΅°μμ(β§55μΈ, p=0.034) λ λΉλκ° λμμΌλ μκΆλ΄λ§μ¦, κΆ€μμ± λμ₯μΌ λ° μ₯κ²°ν΅μ λͺ¨λ μ μ μ°λ Ήκ΅°(οΌ55μΈ)μμ κ΄μ°°λμμΌλ©°, 8λͺ
μ λμ₯μ νμ μ€ 2λͺ
μ 39μΈμ 49μΈλ‘ μ μ λ¨μμμ νμΈλμλ€. κ²°λ‘ : λΉνμ μμΈμΌλ‘ μΆμ ν μ μλ λμ₯μ λ³λ³μ΄ κ³ λ Ήκ΅°μμ λκ² λνλ¬μΌλ, μ μ μ°λ Ήκ΅°μμλ λΉλκ° λμ μ§νμ΄ μμμΌλ©° μΉλͺ
μ μΈ μ§νλ κ΄μ°°λμ΄, λμ₯λ΄μκ²½μ λΉνμ΄ μλ μ μ μ°λ Ήκ΅°κ³Ό κ³ λ Ήκ΅° λͺ¨λμμ μ§λ¨μ μΈ κ°μΉκ° μλ κ²μ¬λ‘ μκ°νλ€.
Background/Aims: For evaluation of anemia, esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is widely used. However, there is no sufficient information on the efficiency and role of colonoscopic evaluation for these anemia patients. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic yield of colonoscopy in anemia patients with nonactive rectal bleeding. Methods: This was a retrospective study from January 2001 to December 2002. We reviewed 147 patients who underwent colonoscopy for anemia evaluation. Results: The mean age was 48 17 years (range 15βΌ90), and male to female ratio was 1οΌ4.3. Ninety-four patients (63.9%) had iron deficiency anemia and 21.8% of them have less than 7 g/dL of hemoglobin. Abnormal colonoscopic findings were observed in 84 patients (57.1%) including hemorrhoid (35), polyp (31), tuberculosis (9), cancer (8), diverticulum (8), endometriosis (1), angiodysplasia (1), and ulcerative colitis (1). The presence of abnormal colonoscopic findings was more frequently observed in older population (β₯55 years old, p=0.034). Intestinal tuberculosis, endometriosis, and ulcerative colitis were observed only in younger population (οΌ55 years old), and 2 of 8 cancer patients were 39 and 49 years old males. Conclusions: Although the diagnostic yield of colonoscopy is relatively higher in older population, colonoscopy is one of the valuable tools in anemia evaluation of both older and younger populations
μ μ μ¬μ±μ μ λ°©μ λ°μν μλ°μ± νλ§ μ‘μ’ 1μ
νλ§ μ‘μ’
μ μ£Όλ‘ κ΄μ μ£Όμ μ‘°μ§μ νΈλ°νλ μ
μ± μ’
μμ΄λ€. μ’
μ’
κ΄μ μ΄μΈμ λ€λ₯Έ λΆμμ λ°μνλ κ²½μ°λ λ³΄κ³ λμ΄μλλ°, μλ°μ± μ λ°© νλ§ μ‘μ’
μ μΈκ³μ μΌλ‘λ λ³΄κ³ λ μκ° λλ¬Όλ€. λ³Έ μ¦λ‘λ μλ°μ± μ λ°© νλ§ μ‘μ’
μΌλ‘ μ§λ¨λ 15μΈ μ¬μ νμμ 1μμ΄λ€. μ§λ¨ ν μ λ°© μ’
κ΄΄μ λν κ΄λ²μ μ μ μ μ μννμμΌλ 9κ°μ ν κ΅μ μ¬λ°νμκ³ , μ΄μ μ¬λ° λΆμμ λν κ΄λ²μ μ μ μ μ λ€μ μννμλ€. κ·Έλ¬λ, 27κ°μ ν νμ μ°μμ½μ κ³ λ¦½μ± ν μ μ΄κ° λ°κ²¬λμλ€. μ΄μ ν λ³λ³μ λν μ μ μ λ° κ³ μμ ννμλ²μΌλ‘ doxorubicin λ° ifosfamideμ λ³ν© ννμλ²μ μννμλ€. νμ¬ νμννμλ² μ’
λ£ ν 28κ°μμ§Έ μ¬λ°μ μ¦κ±° μμ΄ κ²½κ³Όκ΄μ°° μ€μ΄λ€. μ΄μ μ μλ€μ λ³Έ μ¦λ‘λ₯Ό λ¬Ένκ³ μ°°κ³Ό ν¨κ» λ³΄κ³ νλ λ°μ΄λ€
μ νꡬ, νμν λ° μ μ λκ²°νμ₯ μνμ μ μ μ± νκ°
λ°°κ²½ : μ μλ€μ μ νꡬ, νμν, μ μ λκ²°νμ₯ μνμ μ μμ¦μ λν λνμνννμνμ§μΉ¨κ³Ό λ¬Ένκ²ν ν κΈ°μ‘΄μ μλ΄μνμ§μ νꡬ, νμν λ° μ μ λκ²°νμ₯ μνμ μ μ μ± νκ° 453μΉ¨μ κ°μ λ° λ³΄μνμκ³ . μ΄λ₯Ό λ°νμΌλ‘ μμ±λ μνμ μ μ± νκ°νλ₯Ό κ°μ§κ³ , λ³Έμμ μ νꡬ, νμν λ° μ μ λκ²°νμ₯ μνμμ μ μ±μ νκ°νμλ€.λ°©λ² : 2002λ
μ μ΄λλͺ©λλ³μμμ μνλ 26μ(μ νꡬμν14μ, νμνμν 61μ, μ μ λκ²°νμ₯ μν 61μ)μ μνμ λν΄ μ무기λ‘μ νν₯μ μ‘°μ¬μ λ°©λ²μΌλ‘ νκ°νμλ€. κ²°κ³Ό :μ νꡬ, νμν λ° μ μ λκ²°νμ₯μ λΆμ μ μ¬μ©λ₯ μ κ°κ°2.8%, 4.9% λ° 44.3%μ΄μλ€. μ νꡬμν 14μλ κΈμ±μ€νμμμ μν 73μμ λ§μ±λΉνμμμ μν 71μλ‘ κ΅¬μ±λμλλ°, κ°κ°2μμ©μ΄ λΆμ μ μ¬μ©μ΄μλ€. νμνμν 61μλ 골μλΆμ μμμμν 32μμ νλμ± μΆνμμμ 13μ, κΈμ±νμ’
μ±μκ³ μ¦μμμ 6μ λ±μ μ μμ¦μΌλ‘ ꡬμ±λμλ€. μ΄μ€ μμμ μΆνλ‘ μ¬μ©λ 3μκ° λΆμ μ μΌλ‘ νκ°λμλ€. μ μ λκ²°νμ₯μν 61μ μ€ 34μκ° μ μ μ¬μ©λμλλ° μ€μ¦ κ°μ§νμ ν©λ³μ¦μ΄ λλ°λ κ²½μ° 16μ, κΈμ± νμ’
μ±νκ΄λ΄ μκ³ μ¦ 1μ λ° κΈ°ν 7μμ΄μκ³ . 27μκ° λΆμ μ μ¬μ©λμλλ° μ€μ¦ κ°μ§νμ ν©λ³μ¦ μμ΄ PTλ§ μ°μ₯λ 8μ, μμ κ΄λ ¨ 10μ, κΈ°ν 9μμ΄μλ€
μ±μΈ κ³ νμ νμμ κ³ μΉΌμνμ¦ μΉλ£νν©κ³Ό μΉλ£ν¨κ³Ό λΆμ
Background: Hypercalcemia is an important metabolic emergency condition in cancer patients. Bisphosphonate is the treatment of choice for hypercalcemia, whereas calcitonin and hydration with furosemide are recommended for acute supportive therapy
The expression of matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs), tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases (TIMPs) and angiogenesis in relation to the depth of tumor invasion and lymph node metastasis in submucosally invasive colorectal carcinoma
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Lymph node (LN) metastasis occurs in approximately 10% of patients with submucosally invasive colorectal carcinoma. This study was performed to determine the role of matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs), tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases (TIMPs) production and microvessel formation on the LN metastasis in submucosally invasive colorectal carcinoma. METHODS: A total of forty-one subjects with surgically resected submucosally invasive colorectal carcinoma were included in this study. Immunohistochemical staining of MMP-2, MMP-9, TIMP-1, TIMP-2, and urokinase-type plasminogen activator were performed. Angiogenesis was evaluated by counting the number of microvessels in each pathologic specimen as identified by CD34 immunohistochemical staining. RESULTS: The depth of submucosal invasion was not significantly correlated with the expression of MMP-2, MMP-9, TIMP-1, TIMP-2, or urokinase-type plasminogen activator, but the microvessel count was significantly correlated with the absolute depth of invasion (r=0.312, p<0.05). Upregulation of TIMP-2 was positively correlated with adjacent lymphatic invasion (p<0.05) and increased TIMP-2 expression was correlated with LN metastasis in submucosally invasive colorectal carcinoma (p=0.088). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the expression of TIMP-2 and the microvessel count may be useful parameters for considering additional surgery after endoscopic treatment of submucosally invasive colorectal carcinoma.
The Impact of Primary Tumor Resection on the Survival of Patients with Stage IV Breast Cancer
Purpose The main treatment for stage IV breast cancer is currently systemic therapy. Surgical resection of the primary tumor is usually done for treating the tumor-related complications Recent studies have suggested that surgery may improve the long-term survival of stage IV breast cancer patients We evaluated the impact of the primary surgical resection site on the survival of stage IV breast cancer patients. Methods We reviewed the records of the stage IV breast cancer patients who were treated at Seoul University Hospital between April 1992 and December 2007 The tumor and clinical characteristics, the type of treatments and the overall survival were compared between the surgically versus nonsurgically treated patients. Results. Of the 198 identified patients, 110 (55 8%) received surgical excision of their primary tumor and 88 (44 2%) did not The mean survival was 67 months vs. 42 months for the surgically treated patients vs the patients without surgery, respectively (p=0 0287) On a multivariate analysis with using the Cox model and after adjusting for the estrogen receptor status, visceral metastases, the number of metastatic sites and trastuzumab treatment, surgery was an independent factor for improved survival (hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.31-0.97; p=0.041). Conclusion Surgical resection of the primary tumor in stage IV breast cancer patients was independently associated with improved survival. Randomized prospective trials are needed to firmly recommend surgical resection of the primary tumor in stage IV breast cancer patientsλ³Έ μ°κ΅¬λ νμ, μ λ°©μ/λμμ μ μ 체 μ°κ΅¬μΌν°μ μ°κ΅¬λΉλ₯Ό μ§μλ°μ μν
λμμ(01-PJ3-PG6-01GN07-0004).Bafford AC, 2009, BREAST CANCER RES TR, V115, P7, DOI 10.1007/s10549-008-0101-7Blanchard DK, 2008, ANN SURG, V247, P732, DOI 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181656d32*KOR BREAST CANC S, 2008, BREAST CANC FACTS FI, V1, P5Fields RC, 2007, ANN SURG ONCOL, V14, P3345, DOI 10.1245/s10434-007-9527-0Gnerlich J, 2007, ANN SURG ONCOL, V14, P2187, DOI 10.1245/s10434-007-9438-0Rapiti E, 2006, J CLIN ONCOL, V24, P2743, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.2226Morrow M, 2006, J CLIN ONCOL, V24, P2694, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2006.05.9824Babiera GV, 2006, ANN SURG ONCOL, V13, P776, DOI 10.1245/ASO.2006.03.033Hotta T, 2006, ANTICANCER RES, V26, P1377Abe O, 2005, LANCET, V366, P2087Andre F, 2004, J CLIN ONCOL, V22, P3302, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2004.08.095Giordano SH, 2004, CANCER, V100, P44, DOI 10.1002/cncr.11859Khan SA, 2002, SURGERY, V132, P620, DOI 10.1067/msy.2002.127544Flanigan RC, 2001, NEW ENGL J MED, V345, P1655Demicheli R, 2001, BRIT J CANCER, V85, P490Dauplat J, 2000, SEMIN SURG ONCOL, V19, P42Overgaard M, 1999, SEMIN RADIAT ONCOL, V9, P292DOGHETTO GB, 1999, AM SURGEON, V65, P352BLAND KI, 1998, BREAST COMPREHENSIVE, V2Ragaz J, 1997, NEW ENGL J MED, V337, P956OREILLY MS, 1994, CELL, V79, P315FISHER B, 1989, CANCER RES, V49, P1996*NAT CANC I, BREAST CANC TREATM P