7 research outputs found

    The incidence of vitreous loss and visual outcome in patients undergoing cataract surgery in a teaching hospital.

    No full text
    Purpose: To determine the incidence of vitreous loss in patients undergoing cataract surgery and the visual outcome in a tertiary teaching hospital. Methods: Hospital records of 2095 consecutive patients undergoing cataract surgery between July 1999 and June 2000 were reviewed in this non-concurrent cohort study. Incidence and visual outcome of vitreous loss managed using standard vitrectomy techniques were assessed for different cataract surgical techniques (extracapsular, Blumenthal technique and phacoemulsification) as well as at different levels of surgical training. The outcome was compared with matched cases without vitreous loss (controls). Results: Vitreous loss occurred in 160 of 2095 eyes (7.63%; CI -7 to 9.3): 8.3% for ECCE, 8.1% for the Blumenthal technique and 5% with phacoemulsification. Vision 6/18 was achieved in 85% of cases and 95% of controls. For experienced surgeons, 95% of the cases and controls had vision 6/18. 5.8 % of cases and 0.7% of controls had vision < 6/60. One patient in each group was blind following cataract surgery; both had operable cataracts in the fellow eye. Conclusions: The vitreous loss rate in this tertiary teaching hospital is relatively high. This complication, managed with standard surgical techniques, is compatible with good visual outcome. In eyes with vitreous loss, the final visual acuity achieved by experienced surgeons was similar to that in uncomplicated cases

    Three-dimensional modeling of the human fallopian tube fimbriae

    No full text
    OBJECTIVE: Ovarian cancer is the most lethal gynecological malignancy that affects women. Recent data suggests the disease may originate in the fallopian fimbriae; however, the anatomical origin of ovarian carcinogenesis remains unclear. This is largely driven by our lack of knowledge regarding the structure and function of normal fimbriae and the relative paucity of models that accurately recapitulate the in vivo fallopian tube. Therefore, a human three-dimensional (3D) culture system was developed to examine the role of the fallopian fimbriae in serous tumorigenesis. METHODS: Alginate matrix was utilized to support human fallopian fimbriae ex vivo. Fimbriae were cultured with factors hypothesized to contribute to carcinogenesis, namely; H(2)O(2) (1mM) a mimetic of oxidative stress, insulin (5 µg/ml) to stimulate glycolysis, and estradiol (E(2), 10nM) which peaks before ovulation. Cultures were evaluated for changes in proliferation and p53 expression, criteria utilized to identify potential precursor lesions. Further, secretory factors were assessed after treatment with E(2) to identify if steroid signaling induces a pro-tumorigenic microenvironment. RESULTS: 3D fimbriae cultures maintained normal tissue architecture up to 7 days, retaining both epithelial subtypes. Treatment of cultures with H(2)O(2) or insulin significantly induced proliferation. However, p53 stabilization was unaffected by any particular treatment, although was induced by ex vivo culturing. Moreover, E(2)-alone treatment significantly induced its canonical target PR and expression of IL8, a factor linked to poor outcome. CONCLUSIONS: 3D alginate cultures of human fallopian fimbriae provide an important microphysicological model, which can be further utilized to investigate serous tumorigenesis originating from the fallopian tube

    A consolidated screening tool for supportive oncology needs and distress

    No full text
    72 Background: The IOM 2013 Report recommends that supportive oncology care start at cancer diagnosis; the Commission on Cancer (CoC) standard 3.2 requires distress screening and indicated action. Screening tools are not standardized across institutions and often address only a portion of patients’ supportive oncology needs. Methods: A collaborative of 100+ clinicians, funded by The Coleman Foundation, developed a patient-centric consolidated screening tool based on validated instruments (NCCN Distress Problem List, PHQ-4, PROMIS) and IOM and CoC. The screening tool was piloted at 6 practice improvement cancer centers in the Chicago area (3 academic, 2 safety-net, 1 public). Patients, providers assessing each patient’s screening results (assessors), and providers receiving referrals (referral providers) were surveyed after each use of the screening tool. Descriptive statistics were used to assess effectiveness of the tool. Results: Responders included 29 patients, 81 assessors and 26 referral providers (SW, chaplain, subspecialist). The majority of patients (22/29, 75%) completed the screening in < 10 minutes without assistance and will complete at every visit. Most assessors (59/77, 76%) spent < 5 minutes reviewing screening results. The majority of patients, assessors, and referral providers reported that the screening tool asked the “right questions”. Assessors reporting partial relevance of some screening questions for 34% (26/77) of patients, uncovered ≥ 1 relevant needs for 96% (25/26) of those patients (p = 0.002). Conclusions: Use of a consolidated supportive oncology screening tool across multiple institutions is feasible, discovered unmet patient needs, and was beneficial for assessors and providers. As the tool is adopted by collaborating institutions, variations in supportive oncology screening may decline, thus improving access to supportive oncology care with implications for national dissemination. [Table: see text
    corecore