Vestibular Schwannoma growth during pregnancy: case report of neurofibromatosis type 2 in pregnancy

Background: Acoustic neuromas are a common sequela of neurofibromatosis type 2 and have been shown to grow at an increased rate during pregnancy. Case: 21-year-old female, gravida 1 para 0, with history of neurofibromatosis type 2 presented for prenatal care following new onset seizures and progressive deafness. She was found to have bilateral slow-growing acoustic neuromas. Over the course of her pregnancy, her acoustic neuroma began growing and she became completely deaf. She underwent surgical decompression during her pregnancy and had a late preterm vaginal delivery due to preeclampsia with severe features. She subsequently had further operative and medical treatment of her neuromas. Conclusion: Acoustic neuromas during pregnancy are exceedingly rare, but can be managed successfully with an interdisciplinary team approach tailored to the patients’ specific clinical presentation

Small cell carcinoma of the cervix: a retrospective analysis of characteristics important in outcomes

To assess clinical characteristics and treatment modalities in patients with small cell carcinoma of the cervix and the effect this has on overall (OS) and recurrence free survival (RFS)

Superficial versus deep lymph node dissection in early stage vulvar carcinoma

Our primary objective was to evaluate the difference in overall survival, recurrence rate, and post-operative morbidity related to superficial versus deep inguinal lymphadenectomy in squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva

Multimodal perioperative pain protocol for Gynecologic Oncology laparotomy reduces length of hospital stay

Our primary objective was to evaluate the impact of a multimodal perioperative pain regimen on length of hospital stay for patients undergoing laparotomy with a gynecologic oncologist

Is Scotland a Westminster-style Majoritarian Democracy or a Scandinavian-style Consensus Democracy? A Comparison of Scotland, the UK and Sweden

Peer reviewedPostprin

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure fl ux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium ) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the fi eld understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation it is imperative to delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field

High prevalence of fluoroquinolone-resistant UTI among US emergency department patients diagnosed with urinary tract infection, 2018–2020

Background: Uropathogen resistance, fluoroquinolone-resistance (FQR), and extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL), has been observed to be emerging worldwide with prevalences above recommended thresholds for routine empirical treatment. The primary aim of our study was to determine the prevalence of FQR from a geographically diverse sample of United States emergency departments (EDs). Methods: We conducted a multi-center, observational cohort study using a network of 15 geographically diverse US EDs. All patients ≥18 years of age with the primary or secondary diagnosis of urinary tract infection (UTI) in the ED identified using International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) diagnosis code of cystitis, pyelonephritis, or UTI from 2018 to 2020 were included. We calculated descriptive statistics for uropathogens and susceptibilities. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify antimicrobial resistance risk factors associated with FQR Escherichia coli. Results: Among 3779 patients who met inclusion criteria, median age was 62.9 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 41–77.6) and 76.3% were female. The most common diagnoses were complicated (41.2%) and uncomplicated cystitis (40.3%). E. coli was the most common pathogen (63.2%), followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae (13.2%) and Enterococcus species (5.8%). Across all sites, overall E. coli FQ-resistance prevalence was 22.1%, ranging from 10.5 to 29.7% by site. The prevalence of ESBL-producing uropathogen was 7.4%, ranging from 3.6% to 11.6% by site. Previous IV or oral antimicrobial use in the past 90-days and history of a multi-drug resistant pathogen were associated with FQ-resistant E. coli (odds ratio [OR] 2.68, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.04–3.51, and OR 6.93, 95% CI: 4.95–9.70, respectively). Of the patients who had FQ-resistant E. coli or an ESBL-producing uropathogen isolated, 116 (37.1%) and 61 (36.7%) did not have any documented risk factors for resistance. Conclusion: FQ-resistant E. coli is widely prevalent across US sites highlighting the need for ongoing monitoring of antimicrobial resistance and, at some locations, modification of empirical treatments