8 research outputs found

    Hyperechogenic fetal bowel: an ultrasonographic marker for adverse fetal and neonatal outcome?

    Get PDF
    “Soft markers” are considered variants of normal and should be considered distinct from fetal anatomic malformations. Hyperechogenicity of the fetal bowel, is one of the few soft markers that can also associated with a variety of other pathologic conditions. In this review we will focalise our attention on the significate of an increased echogenicity of fetal bowel and on management of fetuses with this condition

    Nonvisualization of fetal gallbladder: a case report and review of the literature

    Get PDF
    Failure to visualize prenatally the gallbladder at ultrasound scan may indicate different fetal malformations with a highly variable prognosis, but also a simple anatomic variable. An adequate prenatal management could help in defining diagnosis and prognosis

    Parvovirus B19 during pregnancy: a review

    Get PDF
    Several infections in adults warrant special consideration in pregnant women given the potential fetal consequences. Among these is parvovirus B19 deserves special attention since the harmful effects on the pregnant woman and fetus. It can then cause fetal anemia, non-immune fetal hydrops and fetal death. Among cases with fetal demise, B19 is foundin significant numbers, especially in the second andthird trimesters of pregnancy. There is no specific treatment or prophylaxis available against B19 infection, but counseling of non-immune mothers and active monitoring of confirmed maternal infections with intervention to correct fetal anemia is likely to decrease mortality

    Update on systemic lupus erythematosus pregnancy

    Get PDF
    Women with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) still face significant risks when embarking on a pregnancy. Improvements in the field of pathophysiology, in diagnosis and a greater number of therapeutic options in the treatment of SLE, have made the medical community regard these patients with less trepidation. Despite these advances, however, the risk of significant morbidity to both the mother and the fetus still exists. The interaction of lupus and pregnancy is very complex: the consensus is that pregnancy can worsen the lupus disease process, even if this is not predictable, and pregnancy can mimic the clinical manifestations of lupus, particularly preeclampsia/ eclampsia. More specifically, pregnancy is associated in 50 to 60% of cases with a clinical flare manifesting as renal or hematological symptoms. Severe flares are uncommon (10%) and the risk of maternal death is now 2 to 3%. The risk of the fetus remains high, however with increased risk of spontaneous fetal wastage and premature births, by 4.8 and 6.8 times, respectively. It is well documented that antiphospholipid syndrome and antiphospholipid antibodies are strongly associated with fetal wastage. Low-dose aspirin or heparin improves fetal outcome in these cases. Timing a pregnancy to coincide with a period of disease quiescence for at least 6 months strongly increases the chances for a healthy and uneventful pregnancy for both mother and baby. Close surveillance, with monitoring of blood pressure, proteinuria and placental blood flow by doppler studies helps the early diagnosis and treatment of complications such as pre-eclampsia and foetal distress. Women with SLE frequently need treatment throughout pregnancy based on hydroxychloroquine, lowdose steroids and azathioprine. This update, based on previous available literature, should inform rheumatologists, obstetricians and neonatologists who guide patients in their reproductive decisions

    Schede relative a: Lecce (parte urbanistica, fortificazioni, porte di città e piazze, arredo urbano), Acquarica del Capo, Alessano (scheda urbanistica), Alezio, Andrano, Bagnolo, Cannole (scheda urbanistica), Carpignano Salentino, Casarano (scheda urbanistica), Castrignano dei Greci, Castrignano del Capo (scheda urbanistica), Giuliano, Salignano, Santa Maria di Leuca, Corigliano d’Otranto, Corsano (scheda urbanistica), Diso (scheda urbanistica), Marittima, Gagliano (scheda urbanistica), Giuggianello (scheda urbanistica), Giurdignano, Merine, Melendugno (scheda urbanistica), Melissano, Specchia Gallone, Montesano Salentino, Morciano di Leuca (scheda urbanistica), Barbarano (scheda urbanistica), Nociglia, Patù, Vaste, Presicce, Salve, Ruggiano, Sannicola, Spongano, Sternatia, Taurisano (scheda urbanistica), Tiggiano, Tricase (scheda urbanistica), Caprarica del Capo, Depressa, Lucugnano, Sant’Eufemia, Tutino, Vernole (scheda urbanistica), Zollino

    No full text

    Durvalumab Plus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin Versus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in Biliary Tract Cancer: a Real-World Retrospective, Multicenter Study

    No full text
    Background: The TOPAZ-1 phase III trial reported a survival benefit with the anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (anti-PD-L1) durvalumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC). Objective: The present study investigated for the first time the impact on survival of adding durvalumab to cisplatin/gemcitabine compared with cisplatin/gemcitabine in a real-world setting. Patients and methods: The analyzed population included patients with unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic BTC treated with durvalumab in combination with cisplatin/gemcitabine or with cisplatin/gemcitabine alone. The impact of adding durvalumab to chemotherapy in terms of overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) was investigated with univariate and multivariate analysis. Results: Overall, 563 patients were included in the analysis: 213 received cisplatin/gemcitabine alone, 350 received cisplatin/gemcitabine plus durvalumab. At the univariate analysis, the addition of durvalumab was found to have an impact on survival, with a median OS of 14.8 months versus 11.2 months [hazard ratio (HR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50-0.80, p = 0.0002] in patients who received cisplatin/gemcitabine plus durvalumab compared to those who received cisplatin/gemcitabine alone. At the univariate analysis for PFS, the addition of durvalumab to cisplatin/gemcitabine demonstrated a survival impact, with a median PFS of 8.3 months and 6.0 months (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.47-0.70, p < 0.0001) in patients who received cisplatin/gemcitabine plus durvalumab and cisplatin/gemcitabine alone, respectively. The multivariate analysis confirmed that adding durvalumab to cisplatin/gemcitabine is an independent prognostic factor for OS and PFS, with patients > 70 years old and those affected by locally advanced disease experiencing the highest survival benefit. Finally, an exploratory analysis of prognostic factors was performed in the cohort of patients who received durvalumab: neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and disease stage were to be independent prognostic factors in terms of OS. The interaction test highlighted NLR ≤ 3, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) = 0, and locally advanced disease as positive predictive factors for OS on cisplatin/gemcitabine plus durvalumab. Conclusion: In line with the results of the TOPAZ-1 trial, adding durvalumab to cisplatin/gemcitabine has been confirmed to confer a survival benefit in terms of OS and PFS in a real-world setting of patients with advanced BTC
    corecore