INITIAL EXPERIENCE OF ENDOSCOPIC SUBMUCOSAL DISSECTION IN BRAZIL TO TREAT EARLY GASTRIC AND ESOPHAGHEAL CANCER: a multi-institutional analysis

Objective This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and clinicopathological characteristics of early gastric and esophageal cancers treated with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) at five centers in Brazil. Methods Five centers in Brazil reported their initial experience with ESD. The cases reported had already been collected by each center before pooled analysis. Results Were resected 62 gastric lesions; 52(83,8%) of the gastric lesions were well-differentiated adenocarcinoma, 31(50%) from the antrum, 24 (38.7%) type IIa. 51 (82.2%) lesions had en-block resection with three showing lateral margin compromise. Concerning invasion, 25 (40.3%) tumors were M1. Mean tumor diameter was 18.9 mm (range, 0.6-5.0 cm) and mean procedure duration was 119.45 minutes. Gastric perforation occurred in three (4.8%) patients. Mean follow-up duration was 11.3 months, with two local recurrences and one death from pneumonia Seven months after treatment. Of the 16 esophageal lesions resected, 14 (87.4%) were squamous cell carcinoma, 10 (62.5%) were located proximally and 8 (50.0%) type IIa. Mean tumor diameter was 23.8 mm (range, 6-60 mm). Thirteen (81.2%) lesions had en-block resection with five cases of lateral margin compromise. Eight (50.0%) lesions were M1. Mean procedure duration was 78 minutes (range, 20-150 min). Complications included pneumomediastinum in two (12.5%) patients and stenosis in one (6.2%). Mean duration of follow-up was 8.6 months, with no local recurrence despite the presence of lateral margin compromise. Conclusion Different centers in Brazil feasibly perform ESD with a high success rate

A judicialização da competição política: o TSE e as coligações eleitorais

Há uma extensa literatura que se debruça sobre os efeitos do poder judiciário no funcionamento dos sistemas políticos. Estaríamos assistindo à judicialização da política? O argumento apresentado é que o entendimento acerca da influência do direito na dinâmica dos sistemas políticos supõe uma noção mais ampla sobre o lócus e o momento em que ocorre sua interferência no funcionamento das democracias contemporâneas. A proposta é discutir a judicialização no que diz respeito à definição das regras da competição político-eleitoral. Para isso, analisaremos a decisão do TSE (Tribunal Superior Eleitoral) referente à verticalização das coligações. O argumento é que o TSE não apenas interpretou uma legislação, mas também estabeleceu um novo regulamento no lugar do poder legislativo. Nossa análise demonstra que a regulamentação das coligações eleitorais é fruto de interação estratégica entre o TSE e o poder legislativo.<br>There is an extensive literature to study the effects of the judiciary power on how political systems work. Is there a judicialization of politics? Our point is that the answer to that question is connected to theoretical questions about the ways to prove and where scholars should look in order to detect the effect of judiciary in democratic systems. In this work we analyze the judicialization of politics under the perspective of the definition of the rules of electoral competition. In order to prove our argument, this article studies how TSE (brazilian judiciary court) rules coalitions in Brazil's political system, known as "verticalização" _the uniformity of party coalitions at state and federal levels. Our case study shows that TSE, in fact, not only interprets the law but, actually, establishes rules, taking the place of the legislative body _which, in turn, made another move. The analysis suggests that the question of judiciary of politics should be seen as an strategic interaction between the two powers