21 research outputs found

    Epidemiological study of women with breast cancer in lower silesia

    No full text

    Screening women aged less than 50 years with a family history of breast cancer

    No full text
    Family history is an important breast cancer risk factor and is a common reason for referral to specialist breast clinics for consideration of breast screening. The aims of this study were to determine cancer detection rates and prognostic features of breast cancers identified in women aged less than 50 years at increased risk of breast cancer who attend a Family History Breast Screening Clinic (FHC). Between January 1988 and December 1995, 1371 asymptomatic women aged less than 50 years underwent annual clinical breast examination and biennial mammography due to a family history of breast cancer. A total of 29 cancers (23 invasive and 6 in situ) were detected or presented as interval cancer during a mean follow-up of 22 months (range 0-96 months). This gave a relative risk for invasive breast cancer in this high-risk group of 5 when compared with an age-matched female population in the U.K. The cancer screening detection rates were similar to those of women aged 50 years or over undergoing population screening in the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP)--FHC prevalent screen 8 per 1000 screening visits versus NHSBSP 6.5 per 1000, FHC incident screen 3.3 per 1000 screening visits versus NHSBSP 3.8 per 1000. A higher proportion of in situ cancers were detected in the FHC screened group compared with cancers identified in symptomatic patients from an age-matched risk group (21% versus 4%). No differences were demonstrated for invasive tumour size, grade or lymph node stage between symptomatic and screened women. The early results of this study suggests that young women at risk of breast cancer due to a family history may benefit from regular breast screening due to the early detection of in situ lesions

    Patients with Crohn's disease have longer post-operative in-hospital stay than patients with colon cancer but no difference in complications' rate

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUNDRight hemicolectomy or ileocecal resection are used to treat benign conditions like Crohn's disease (CD) and malignant ones like colon cancer (CC).AIMTo investigate differences in pre- and peri-operative factors and their impact on post-operative outcome in patients with CC and CD.METHODSThis is a sub-group analysis of the European Society of Coloproctology's prospective, multi-centre snapshot audit. Adult patients with CC and CD undergoing right hemicolectomy or ileocecal resection were included. Primary outcome measure was 30-d post-operative complications. Secondary outcome measures were post-operative length of stay (LOS) at and readmission.RESULTSThree hundred and seventy-five patients with CD and 2,515 patients with CC were included. Patients with CD were younger (median = 37 years for CD and 71 years for CC (P < 0.01), had lower American Society of Anesthesiology score (ASA) grade (P < 0.01) and less comorbidity (P < 0.01), but were more likely to be current smokers (P < 0.01). Patients with CD were more frequently operated on by colorectal surgeons (P < 0.01) and frequently underwent ileocecal resection (P < 0.01) with higher rate of de-functioning/primary stoma construction (P < 0.01). Thirty-day post-operative mortality occurred exclusively in the CC group (66/2515, 2.3%). In multivariate analyses, the risk of post-operative complications was similar in the two groups (OR 0.80, 95%CI: 0.54-1.17; P = 0.25). Patients with CD had a significantly longer LOS (Geometric mean 0.87, 95%CI: 0.79-0.95; P < 0.01). There was no difference in re-admission rates. The audit did not collect data on post-operative enhanced recovery protocols that are implemented in the different participating centers.CONCLUSIONPatients with CD were younger, with lower ASA grade, less comorbidity, operated on by experienced surgeons and underwent less radical resection but had a longer LOS than patients with CC although complication's rate was not different between the two groups

    Safety of primary anastomosis following emergency left sided colorectal resection: an international, multi-centre prospective audit.

    Get PDF
    This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: group, T. E. S. o. C. c. (2018). "Safety of primary anastomosis following emergency left sided colorectal resection: an international, multi-centre prospective audit." Colorectal Disease 20(S6): 47-57., which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.1437. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived VersionsINTRODUCTION: Some evidence suggests that primary anastomosis following left sided colorectal resection in the emergency setting may be safe in selected patients, and confer favourable outcomes to permanent enterostomy. The aim of this study was to compare the major postoperative complication rate in patients undergoing end stoma vs primary anastomosis following emergency left sided colorectal resection. METHODS: A pre-planned analysis of the European Society of Coloproctology 2017 audit. Adult patients (> 16 years) who underwent emergency (unplanned, within 24 h of hospital admission) left sided colonic or rectal resection were included. The primary endpoint was the 30-day major complication rate (Clavien-Dindo grade 3 to 5). RESULTS: From 591 patients, 455 (77%) received an end stoma, 103 a primary anastomosis (17%) and 33 primary anastomosis with defunctioning stoma (6%). In multivariable models, anastomosis was associated with a similar major complication rate to end stoma (adjusted odds ratio for end stoma 1.52, 95%CI 0.83-2.79, P = 0.173). Although a defunctioning stoma was not associated with reduced anastomotic leak (12% defunctioned [4/33] vs 13% not defunctioned [13/97], adjusted odds ratio 2.19, 95%CI 0.43-11.02, P = 0.343), it was associated with less severe complications (75% [3/4] with defunctioning stoma, 86.7% anastomosis only [13/15]), a lower mortality rate (0% [0/4] vs 20% [3/15]), and fewer reoperations (50% [2/4] vs 73% [11/15]) when a leak did occur. CONCLUSIONS: Primary anastomosis in selected patients appears safe after left sided emergency colorectal resection. A defunctioning stoma might mitigate against risk of subsequent complications
    corecore