Evaluation of diagnostic algorithm and therapeutic interventions for intra-abdominal desmoid tumors

Desmoid-type fibromatosis (DF) is a distinctly rare condition, mostly of younger adults, characterized by the development of locally aggressive tumors of mesenchymal origin. Desmoid tumors (DT) arise either sporadically or in association with FAP (familial adenomatous polyposis), although certain risk factors have also been identified, including pregnancy and antecedent surgical trauma. They can emerge from any connective tissue including muscle, fascia and aponeurosis and are therefore classified, according to location, as intra-abdominal, of the abdominal wall and extra-abdominal. Despite the lack of metastasizing potential, the course can be unpredictable. Various mutations of APC and β-catenin genes, among others, play a catalytic role in the pathogenesis of this neoplastic entity. Surgery has lost its traditional role as first line treatment of the disease and several other treatment methods are being considered. Cytotoxic chemotherapy, non-cytotoxic systemic therapy and targeted therapy have been revealed as part of different treatment regimens. Recent progress regarding DT biology and molecular pathways has led to the development of promising novel biological agents. In any case, a multidisciplinary approach is required and is gradually employed, espe-cially in intra-abdominal DTs. In this review, we aim to present current knowledge on DF and summarize current treatment regimens as well as their effectiveness, with emphasis on the intraperitoneal type of DT.     

Minimally Invasive Treatments for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

PurposeTo review and to compare indirectly the outcomes of minimally invasive therapies for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia.Materials and MethodsA literature search via Medline and Cochrane Central databases was completed for randomized control studies published between January 2000 to April 2020 for the following therapies: Rezum, Urolift, Aquablation, and prostatic artery embolization (PAE). Data on the following variables were included: International prostate symptom score (IPSS), maximum urinary flow rate, quality of life, and postvoid residual (PVR). Standard mean differences between treatments were compared through a meta-analysis using transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) to assess differences in treatment effect.ResultsThere was no significant difference in outcomes between therapies for IPSS at the 3, 6, and 12-month follow ups. Although outcomes for Rezum were only available out to 3 months, there were no consistently significant differences in outcomes when comparing Aquablation versus PAE versus Rezum. TURP PVR was significantly better than Urolift at 3, 6, and 12 months. No significant differences in minor or major adverse events were noted.ConclusionAlthough significant differences in outcomes were limited, Aquablation and PAE were the most durable at 12 months. PAE has been well studied on multiple randomized control trials with minimal adverse events while Aquablation has limited high quality data and has been associated with bleeding-related complications.     

Brachytherapy: An emblematic example of extreme hypofractionated regimen

In order to provide more convenient irradiation regimens for patient comfort, radiation facility organization and health expenses, new hypofractionated protocols have been evaluated. Moderately (dose/fraction: 2.3 to 3 Gy), then ultra (dose/fraction: 5.2 to 6.1 Gy) hypofractionated irradiations were first validated. The current question is: is it possible to go forward using extreme hypofractionated regimens (EHR) based on 1 to 3 fractions. Different irradiation techniques are under investigation. However, brachytherapy remains the smartest way to deliver a high dose in a small volume. We report prospective and retrospective study results which evaluated EHR for breast and prostate brachytherapy. While oncological outcome and toxicity profile appear extremely encouraging for low-risk breast cancer after a 1 to 4 fractions (6.25 to 20 Gy/fraction), the use of a single fraction of 19 to 23 Gy appears debatable for prostate cancer. Brachytherapy represents an emblematic example of EHR but longer follow-up and more mature results are awaited in order to specify the right indications and refine the EQD2 calculation method including new biological and technical factors.     

钨针电刀在耳内镜鼓膜修补手术中的应用

目的探讨钨针电刀在耳内镜鼓膜修补手术中的应用。方法选取2018年8月-2019年8月住院行耳内镜鼓膜修补的患者85例。其中采用外耳道皮瓣刀行外耳道内切口的40例为对照组,采用钨针电刀行外耳道内切口的45例为观察组,对比分析两组患者手术中和手术后效果。结果观察组比较对照组切口时间短、切口出血量少、术中镜头擦拭次数少、术中止血海绵粒使用量小,两组差别具有统计学意义(t=-13.6、-9.0、-7.6、-12.8、P<0.05);两组患者在术后愈合时间,外耳道狭窄程度方面差别不大,无统计学意义。观察组缺点是电刀使用过程中会产生烟雾,需要助手辅助吸引烟雾。结论钨针电刀小巧灵活,精细准确,具有减少切口出血,缩短手术时间的优点,适合在耳内镜外耳道手术中推广应用。     

A comparison of mobilization and mobilization with movement on pain and range of motion in people with lateral ankle sprain: A randomized clinical trial

BackgroundMaitland and Mulligan mobilization techniques are two manual therapy methods to increase the range of motion following immobility treatment. The present study was conducted to compare two therapeutic methods, namely mobilization and mobilization with movement (MWM), on the pain and range of motion in people with lateral ankle sprain.MethodsA total of 40 individuals with grade two lateral ankle sprain were randomly divided into two groups, including the Maitland's mobilization intervention group, and the Mulligan's mobilization intervention group. Both groups underwent treatment every other day for two consecutive weeks. The pain intensity was measured using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and the ankle dorsiflexion movement range using the Weight Bearing Lunge Test (WBLT) before and one day after the intervention.ResultsThere were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of pain (P = 0.297) and range of motion (P = 0.294) before the intervention. Meanwhile, after the intervention, a significant change was observed in both groups in terms of these variables, which indicates the effectiveness of both interventions (P < 0.001) and the greater effect of the mobilization with movement in reducing pain (P = 0.037) and increasing the range of motion (P = 0.021).ConclusionsBoth techniques significantly improved the range of motion and reduced pain in people with lateral ankle sprain, but Mulligan's technique was significantly more effective among the two, perhaps due to joining active and passive mobilizing tensile forces as well as interaction of afferents and efferents in the reflex arc.     

逆行髓内钉辅助在儿童股骨延长中的应用

目的采用髓内钉辅助延长技术进行儿童股骨大段延长,评估其可行性,并对比同期矫正和分期手术的技术要点,明确此技术在儿童患儿中的应用价值。方法自2014年7月7日至2018年1月16日共规划完成逆行髓内钉辅助延长手术10例,其中男9例,女1例;年龄(13.10±2.18)岁。所有患儿延长截骨点均位于股骨远端干骺端,初诊至末次随访记录内容包括:性别、出生日期、不等长病因及治疗史、术时年龄、延长长度、带架时间、延长段愈合时间、屈膝角度、并发症等。比较同期延长和分期矫正的愈合时间,采用SPSS 22.0软件进行统计分析,提出合理的治疗策略。结果10例患儿患肢平均延长(7.07±1.01)cm,中位带架时间为8.5(4,16)个月,中位随访时间为39(34,54)个月。所有病例均获得了良好的临床和影像学愈合,并全部恢复正常行走功能,无延长后骨折发生。同期矫正与分期手术间在愈合速度为[(1.70±1.10)月/cm vs.(1.16±0.54)月/cm],膝关节功能(136.67°±20.82°vs.125.71°±26.37°)和并发症率方面的差异均无统计学意义。结论外固定架辅助逆行髓内钉技术进行股骨延长治疗儿童股骨短缩畸形是可行的,是股骨延长的有效手术方式之一;较轻的角度畸形和延长手术可同期进行;干骺端截骨延长成骨质量更佳,可有效减少带架时间;内生软骨瘤患儿的病变区延长是安全的。     

医用退热贴冷敷治疗产后生理性乳房胀痛的效果观察

目的 比较医用退热贴冷敷及卷心菜叶外敷2种方法对缓解产后生理性乳房胀痛的疗效。方法 选取2018年3-12月在产科住院的产后生理性乳房胀痛的患者100例为研究对象,将其随机分为对照组和观察组,各50例。对照组采用卷心菜叶外敷,观察组采用医用退热贴冷敷。结果 观察组产后生理性胀痛乳房评分低于对照组(Z=-2.568,P=0.010),乳房硬度优于对照组(Z=-4.361,P<0.001),使用维持时间长于对照组(t=19.804,P＜0.001)。结论 医用退热贴冷敷用于产后生理性乳房胀痛效果理想,操作方法简单易行,实施方便,易被产妇接受,值得临床推广应用。     

Effects of manual therapy on body posture: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundSeveral clinical trials investigated the effectiveness of MT on body posture, but a systematic review grouping the results of these studies was not found in the literature.Research questionDoes manual therapy (MT) cause postural changes?MethodsInclusion criteria were: randomized controlled trials in any population; studies in which the primary intervention was the use of any MT technique; studies that evaluated the immediate, short, medium, or long-term effects of interventions on body posture; and studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals in any year and language. In March 2022, we conducted a search in the PUBMED, Cinahl, Embase, PEDro, and Cochrane Central databases that yielded 6627 articles, of which 38 including 1597 participants were eligible; of these, 35 could be grouped into 12 meta-analyses. The risk of bias was assessed using the PEDro scale and the certainty in the scientific evidence rated through the GRADE system.ResultsThe results allowed us to conclude with moderate certainty in the evidence that, when compared to no intervention or sham, in the short and medium term, MT reduced the forward head posture (14 studies, 584 individuals, 95%CI 0.38, 1.06), reduced thoracic kyphosis (5 studies, 217 individuals, 95%CI 0.37, 0.94), improved lateral pelvic tilt (5 studies, 211 individuals, 95%CI 0.11, 0.67) and pelvic torsion (2 studies, 120 individuals, 95%CI 0.44, 1.19) and increased plantar area (3 studies, 134 individuals, 95%CI 0.04, 0.74). With moderate certainty, there was no significant effect on shoulder protrusion (5 studies, 176 individuals, 95%CI −0.11, 0.61), shoulder alignment in the frontal plane (3 studies, 160 individuals, 95%CI −0.15, 0.52), scoliosis (2 studies, 26 individuals, 95%CI −1.57, 2.19), and pelvic anteversion (5 studies, 233 individuals, 95%CI −0.02, 0.51). With low certainty, MT had no effect on scapular upward rotation (2 studies, 74 individuals, 95%CI −0.76, 2.17). With low to very low certainty, it is possible to conclude that MT was not superior to other interventions in the short or medium term regarding the improvement of forward head posture (5 studies, 170 individuals, 95%CI −1.39, 0.67) and shoulder protrusion (3 studies, 94 individuals, 95%CI −4.04, 0.97).SignificanceMT can be recommended to improve forward head posture, thoracic kyphosis and pelvic alignment in the short and medium term, but not shoulder posture and scoliosis. MT reduces the height of the plantar arch and this must be taken into account in physical therapy planning. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021244423.