14 research outputs found
The additional value of TGFβ1 and IL-7 to predict the course of prostate cancer progression
Background: Given the fact that prostate cancer incidence will increase in the coming years, new prognostic biomarkers are needed with regard to the biological aggressiveness of the prostate cancer diagnosed. Since cytokines have been associated with the biology of cancer and its prognosis, we determined whether transforming growth factor beta 1 (TGFβ1), interleukin-7 (IL-7) receptor and IL-7 levels add additional prognostic information with regard to prostate cancer
Insight from an Italian Delphi Consensus on EVAR feasibility outside the instruction for use: the SAFE EVAR Study
BACKGROUND: The SAfety and FEasibility of standard EVAR outside the instruction for use (SAFE-EVAR) Study was designed to define the attitude of Italian vascular surgeons towards the use of standard endovascular repair (EVAR) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) outside the instruction for use (IFU) through a Delphi consensus endorsed by the Italian Society of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery (Societa Italiana di Chirurgia Vascolare ed Endovascolare - SICVE). METHODS: A questionnaire consisting of 26 statements was developed, validated by an 18 -member Advisory Board, and then sent to 600 Italian vascular surgeons. The Delphi process was structured in three subsequent rounds which took place between April and June 2023. In the first two rounds, respondents could indicate one of the following five degrees of agreement: 1) strongly agree; 2) partially agree; 3) neither agree nor disagree; 4) partially disagree; 5) strongly disagree; while in the third round only three different choices were proposed: 1) agree; 2) neither agree nor disagree; 3) disagree. We considered the consensus reached when >70% of respondents agreed on one of the options. After the conclusion of each round, a report describing the percentage distribution of the answers was sent to all the participants. RESULTS: Two -hundred -forty-four (40.6%) Italian Vascular Surgeons agreed to participate the first round of the Delphi Consensus; the second and the third rounds of the Delphi collected 230 responders (94.3% of the first -round responders). Four statements (15.4%) reached a consensus in the first rounds. Among the 22 remaining statements, one more consensus (3.8%) was achieved in the second round. Finally, seven more statements (26.9%) reached a consensus in the simplified last round. Globally, a consensus was reached for almost half of the proposed statements (46.1%). CONCLUSIONS: The relatively low consensus rate obtained in this Delphi seems to confirm the discrepancy between Guideline recommendations and daily clinical practice. The data collected could represent the source for a possible guidelines' revision and the proposal of specific Good Practice Points in all those aspects with only little evidence available
Disease-specific and general health-related quality of life in newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients: The Pros-IT CNR study
Background: The National Research Council (CNR) prostate cancer monitoring project in Italy (Pros-IT CNR) is an observational, prospective, ongoing, multicentre study aiming to monitor a sample of Italian males diagnosed as new cases of prostate cancer. The present study aims to present data on the quality of life at time prostate cancer is diagnosed. Methods: One thousand seven hundred five patients were enrolled. Quality of life is evaluated at the time cancer was diagnosed and at subsequent assessments via the Italian version of the University of California Los Angeles-Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA-PCI) and the Short Form Health Survey (SF-12). Results: At diagnosis, lower scores on the physical component of the SF-12 were associated to older ages, obesity and the presence of 3+ moderate/severe comorbidities. Lower scores on the mental component were associated to younger ages, the presence of 3+ moderate/severe comorbidities and a T-score higher than one. Urinary and bowel functions according to UCLA-PCI were generally good. Almost 5% of the sample reported using at least one safety pad daily to control urinary loss; less than 3% reported moderate/severe problems attributable to bowel functions, and sexual function was a moderate/severe problem for 26.7%. Diabetes, 3+ moderate/severe comorbidities, T2 or T3-T4 categories and a Gleason score of eight or more were significantly associated with lower sexual function scores at diagnosis. Conclusions: Data collected by the Pros-IT CNR study have clarified the baseline status of newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients. A comprehensive assessment of quality of life will allow to objectively evaluate outcomes of different profile of care
PATIENTS WITH PERIOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS PRESENTED AN HIGHER RISK OF CANCER SPECIFIC MORTALITY AFTER RADICAL CYSTECTOMY: A TWO YEAR MULTICENTRE ITALIAN REAL-LIFE ANALYSIS
I PAZIENTI CON COMPLICANZE PERIOPERATORIE PRESENTANO UN PIÙ ALTO RISCHIO DI MORTALITÀ CANCRO SPECIFICA DOPO CISTECTOMIA RADICALE: DUE ANNI DI STUDIO MULTICENTRICO ITALIANO
Promoting innovation in Geoscience education: the experience of Geology Courses of the University of Perugia
Perioperative Outcomes of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Prospective Multicenter Observational Study (The RECORd 2 Project)
Background: Partial nephrectomy (PN) has a non-negligible perioperative morbidity.
Comparative evidence of the available surgical techniques is limited.
Objective: To compare the perioperative outcomes of open, laparoscopic, and robotic
PN.
Methods: Data of 2331 patients treated with PN for cT1 renal tumors were extracted
from the RECORd2 database, a prospective multicenter project. Multivariable regression
models assessed the relationship between surgical technique and surgical margins,warm ischemia time, postoperative complications, and acute kidney injury (AKI). The
probability of achieving a modified trifecta (negative margins, warm ischemia time <25
min, and no Clavien–Dindo 2 complications) was examined for each surgical approach.
Results: Minimally invasive techniques had lower rate of Clavien–Dindo 2 complica-
tions than that of open surgery (odds ratio [OR] for robotic surgery: 0.27; 95% confidence
interval [95% CI]: 0.15–0.47, p < 0.0001; OR for laparoscopy: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.34–0.78; p =
0.002). The probability of receiving ischemia was highest for robotic PN (p < 0.001).
Among on-clamp PN, laparoscopy had longer ischemia than open (estimate: 1.09; 95%
CI: –0.00 to 2.18; p = 0.050) and robotic (estimate: 1.36; 95% CI: 0.31–2.40; p = 0.011)
surgery. When compared with open PN, the risk of AKI was roughly halved for patients
treated by robotic and laparoscopic surgery (both p < 0.0001). Positive margins rate did
not differ between the groups (all p 0.1). The likelihood to achieve a modified trifecta
was not affected by surgical technique in the overall population (all p 0.075). In
Preoperative Aspects and Dimensions Used for an Anatomical (PADUA) score
< 10 lesions, robotic surgery had higher probability of achieving a modified trifecta
than open PN (OR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.09–2.53; p = 0.018) and laparoscopy (OR: 1.34; 95% CI:
0.94–1.90; p = 0.11).
Conclusions: In PADUA < 10 renal tumors, robotic PN allows for higher rates of trifecta
than open and laparoscopic surgeries. The impact of surgical technique on perioperative
outcomes of PN might be limited in more complex lesions.
Patient summary: We evaluated the association between surgical technique and peri-
operative outcomes of partial nephrectomy. In less complex (Preoperative Aspects and
Dimensions Used for an Anatomical [PADUA] score < 10) lesions, robotic PN allows for
higher rates of trifecta when compared with other surgical techniques
Insight from an Italian Delphi Consensus on EVAR feasibility outside the instruction for use: the SAFE EVAR Study
Background: The SAfety and FEasibility of standard EVAR outside the instruction for use (SAFE-EVAR) Study was designed to define the attitude of Italian vascular surgeons towards the use of standard endovascular repair (EVAR) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) outside the instruction for use (IFU) through a Delphi consensus endorsed by the Italian Society of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery (Società Italiana di Chirurgia Vascolare ed Endovascolare - SICVE). Methods: A questionnaire consisting of 26 statements was developed, validated by an 18-member Advisory Board, and then sent to 600 Italian vascular surgeons. The Delphi process was structured in three subsequent rounds which took place between April and June 2023. In the first two rounds, respondents could indicate one of the following five degrees of agreement: 1) strongly agree; 2) partially agree; 3) neither agree nor disagree; 4) partially disagree; 5) strongly disagree; while in the third round only three different choices were proposed: 1) agree; 2) neither agree nor disagree; 3) disagree. We considered the consensus reached when ≥70% of respondents agreed on one of the options. After the conclusion of each round, a report describing the percentage distribution of the answers was sent to all the participants. Results: Two-hundred-forty-four (40.6%) Italian Vascular Surgeons agreed to participate the first round of the Delphi Consensus; the second and the third rounds of the Delphi collected 230 responders (94.3% of the first-round responders). Four statements (15.4%) reached a consensus in the first rounds. Among the 22 remaining statements, one more consensus (3.8%) was achieved in the second round. Finally, seven more statements (26.9%) reached a consensus in the simplified last round. Globally, a consensus was reached for almost half of the proposed statements (46.1%). Conclusions: The relatively low consensus rate obtained in this Delphi seems to confirm the discrepancy between Guideline recommendations and daily clinical practice. The data collected could represent the source for a possible guidelines' revision and the proposal of specific Good Practice Points in all those aspects with only little evidence available
How radical prostatectomy procedures have changed over the last 10\ua0years in Italy: a comparative analysis based on more than 1500 patients participating in the MIRROR-SIU/LUNA and the Pros-IT CNR study
Purpose: Therapeutic strategies for prostate cancer (PCa) have been evolving dramatically worldwide. The current article reports on the evolution of surgical management strategies for PCa in Italy. Methods: The data from two independent Italian multicenter projects, the MIRROR-SIU/LUNA (started in 2007, holding data of 890 patients) and the Pros-IT-CNR project (started in 2014, with data of 692 patients), were compared. Differences in patients\u2019 characteristics were evaluated. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify characteristics associated with robot-assisted (RA) procedure, nerve sparing (NS) approach, and lymph node dissection (LND). Results: The two cohorts did not differ in terms of age and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels at biopsy. Patients enrolled in the Pros-IT-CNR project more frequently were submitted to RA (58.8% vs 27.6%, p < 0.001) and NS prostatectomy (58.4% vs. 52.9%, p = 0.04), but received LND less frequently (47.7% vs. 76.7%, p < 0.001), as compared to the MIRROR-SIU/LUNA patients. At multivariate logistic models, Lower Gleason Scores (GS) and PSA levels were significantly associated with RA prostatectomy in both cohorts. As for the MIRROR-SIU/LUNA data, clinical T-stage was a predictor for NS (OR = 0.07 for T3, T4) and LND (OR = 2.41 for T2) procedures. As for Pros-IT CNR data, GS 65 (4 + 3) and positive cancer cores 65 50% were decisive factors both for NS (OR 0.29 and 0.30) and LND (OR 7.53 and 2.31) strategies. Conclusions: PCa management has changed over the last decade in Italian centers: RA and NS procedures without LND have become the methods of choice to treat newly medium\u2013high risk diagnosed PCa
Correction to: Major adverse cardiovascular events in non-valvular atrial fibrillation with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: the ARAPACIS study (Internal and Emergency Medicine, (2018), 13, 5, (651-660), 10.1007/s11739-018-1835-9)
In the original publication, one of the ARAPACIS collaborators Dr. “Leonardo Di Gennaro” name has been erroneously mentioned as “Leonardo De Gennaro”