Proteases and their inhibitors as prognostic factors for high-grade serous ovarian cancer

Ovarian carcinoma is one of the most lethal malignancies, but only very few prognostic biomarkers are known. The degradome, comprising proteases, protease non-proteolytic homologues and inhibitors, have been involved in the prognosis of many cancer types, including ovarian carcinoma. The prognostic significance of the whole degradome family has not been specifically studied in high-grade serous ovarian cancer. A targeted DNA microarray known as the CLIP-CHIP microarray was used to identify potential prognostic factors in ten high-grade serous ovarian cancer women who had early recurrence (<1.6 years) or late/no recurrence after first line surgery and chemotherapy. In women with early recurrence, we identified seven upregulated genes (TMPRSS4, MASP1/3, SPC18, PSMB1, IGFBP2, CFI – encoding Complement Factor I – and MMP9) and one down-regulated gene (ADAM-10). Using immunohistochemistry, we evaluated the prognostic effect of these 8 candidate genes in an independent cohort of 112 high-grade serous ovarian cancer women. Outcomes were progression, defined according to CA-125 criteria, and death. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression models were done to estimate the associations between each protein and each outcome. High ADAM-10 expression (intensity of 2–3) was associated with a lower risk of progression (adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 0.51; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.29-0.87). High complement factor I expression (intensity 2–3) was associated with a higher risk of progression (adjusted HR: 2.30, 95% CI: 1.17–4.53) and death (adjusted HR: 3.42; 95% CI: 1.72–6.79). Overall, we identified the prognostic value of two proteases, ADAM-10 and complement factor I, for high-grade serous ovarian cancer which could have clinical significance.     

Accuracy and Precision of Acetabular Component Placement With Imageless Navigation in Obese Patients

Background

Obesity is a risk factor for acetabular component malposition when total hip arthroplasty is performed with manual techniques. The utility of imageless navigation in obese patients remains unknown. This study compared the accuracy and precision of imageless navigation for component orientation between obese and nonobese patients.

Generalisierter Krampfanfall während der Anlage einer axillären Plexusblockade

Die Anaesthesiologie - Eine junge Patientin erleidet während der Anlage einer axillären Plexusblockade einen generalisierten Krampfanfall. Die Mechanismen, im Wesentlichen die vermutlich...     

Anatomic vs. reverse shoulder arthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis with intact rotator cuff: a retrospective comparison of patient-reported outcomes using the systems outcomes database with up to 5-year follow-up

BackgroundThe growing enthusiasm for the use of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) in the treatment of primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA) with an intact rotator cuff is based on data derived from single-center studies with limited generalizability and follow-up. This study compared patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between RSA and total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) for the treatment of primary GHOA with up to 5-year follow-up and examined temporal trends in the treatment of GHOA between 2012 and 2021.MethodsA retrospective review was performed on patients with primary GHOA undergoing primary arthroplasty surgery from the Surgical Outcomes System global registry between 2012 and 2021. PROs including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score, and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were compared between RSA and TSA at 1, 2, and 5 years postoperatively.ResultsA total of 4451 patients were included, with 2693 (60.5%) undergoing TSA and 1758 (39.5%) undergoing RSA. Both RSA and TSA provided clinically excellent outcomes at 1 year postoperatively (ASES: 80.8 ± 17.9 vs. 85.9 ± 15.2, respectively; SANE: 74.8 ± 24.7 vs. 79.5 ± 22.9; VAS pain: 1.3 ± 2.0 vs. 1.1 ± 1.7; all P < .05) that were maintained at 2 years (ASES: 81.3 ± 19.3 vs. 87.3 ± 14.9; SANE: 74.8 ± 26.2 vs. 79.7 ± 24.7; VAS pain: 1.3 ± 2.1 vs. 1.0 ± 1.6; all P < .05) and 5 years (ASES: 81.7 ± 16.5 vs. 86.9 ± 15.3; SANE: 71.6 ± 28.5 vs. 78.2 ± 25.9; VAS pain: 1.0 ± 1.7 vs. 1.0 ± 1.7; all P < .05), with statistical significance favoring TSA. After controlling for age and sex, there was an adjusted difference of 4.5 units in the ASES score favoring TSA (P = .005) at 5 years postoperatively but no differences in adjusted SANE (P = .745) and VAS pain (P = .332) scores. The use of RSA for GHOA grew considerably over time, from representing only 17% of all replacements performed for GHOA in 2012 to nearly half (47%) in 2021 (P < .001).ConclusionRSA as a treatment for GHOA with an intact rotator cuff seems to yield PROs that are largely clinically equivalent to TSA extending to 5 years postoperatively. The observed statistical significance favoring TSA appears to be of marginal clinical benefit based on established minimal clinically important differences and may be a result of the large sample size. Further research using more granular clinical data and examining differences in range of motion and complications is warranted as it may change the value analysis.     

Are hand biomechanics affected following radial forearm flap harvest? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Donor site morbidity following radial forearm flap (RFF) harvest remains a controversial issue. The aim of this meta-analysis was to answer the question “Are the range of wrist movements (range of motion, ROM) and hand strength affected after RFF harvesting?” The PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library electronic databases were systematically searched (to December 2019). Self-controlled studies evaluating hand biomechanics after RFF harvest were included. Weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the random-effects model. The outcome variables were ROM, forearm movements, grip, and pinch strengths. Thirteen studies involving a total of 335 patients were included. With the exception of grip strength and supination, which showed statistically significant reductions of about 2.40 kg and 2.86° (P < 0.05), all other ROM, forearm movements, and pinch strengths showed an insignificant difference when the operated hand was compared to the non-operated hand (P > 0.05). Regression analysis showed that the method of donor site closure and size of the donor site defect had an insignificant impact on hand biomechanics. This study confirms the lack of discernible biomechanical morbidity after RFF transfer. The minimal reduction in hand biomechanics after RFF is considered to be clinically negligible.