Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is one of the most common malignant tumors in human medicine and the most common skin malignancy, with the largest number of lesions found on exposed parts of the skin, on the face, head, and neck. The average age of the patients is 60 years, with an increasing incidence in younger ages and an increased incidence in males. The incidence of BCC is increasing and doubles every 25 years. Annually, there are approximately 1,000,000 newly diagnosed cases worldwide. The frequency of malignant skin tumors depends on the influence of external factors such as UV radiation and other biological properties of the skin with a higher incidence in fair-skinned people (Fitzpatrick type I and type II skin types). BCC is a slow growing malignant tumor that arises from the basal layer of the epidermis, the outer layer of hair follicles, or the sebaceous glands. BCC can be locally invasive and, if neglected, can infiltrate surrounding structures (muscles and cartilage) and vital structures, which can ultimately lead to death. The clinical presentation is very diverse and dependent on the histological subtype. Prevention is the most important and effective approach towards reducing the burden of BCC. The best treatment for BCC is surgical excision with confirmation and verification of surgical margins. The therapeutic goal is oncologic radical resection of the tumor, followed by reconstruction of the affected area for structure and optimal aesthetic result.
Introduction From April 2009 to December 2016, 661 consecutive patients undergoing sinus surgery completed a quality of life (QOL) questionnaire (SNOT-22) preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Objective (1) To evaluate the long-term efficacy of sinus surgery using QOL instruments. (2) To determine the optimal evaluation time for surgical efficacy. (3) To determine if surgical results improve with yearly experience. Methods The prospective study patients were split into two groups: Group A, those who completed the initial preoperative evaluation and all postoperative evaluations, and Group B, who completed the preoperative questionnaire and at least one but not all of the postoperative questionnaires. Group A included 93 patients. Group B included 240 patients at 3 months, 180 at 6 months, and 121 at 12 months postoperatively. Results Group A efficacy reported at 3 months was 82.8%, 80.6% at 6 months, and 84.9% at 12 months postoperatively. Group B efficacy reported at 3 months was 71.3%, 78.3% at 6 months, and 84.3% at 12 months postoperatively. An 8-year trend analysis of year-to-year 12 months postoperative data illustrates a significant improvement with an analysis of variance (ANOVA) linear rate of 1.594 (p ≤0.12). Conclusion The 8-year trend at 12 months postoperatively shows a positive improvement in surgical results. Patients undergoing sinus surgery at tertiary medical center showed 84.9% improvement in sinus disease symptoms by 12 months postoperatively. Long-term improvement analysis showed no difference between 6 months postoperatively and 12 months, signifying 6 months as an effective evaluation for surgical efficacy.
There is no definitive consensus about the cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (AVR) (MI-AVR) compared to conventional AVR (C-AVR). The aim of this study was to compare the rate of postoperative complications and total hospital costs of MI-AVR versus C-AVR overall and by the type of aortic prosthesis (biological or mechanical). Our single-center retrospective study included 324 patients over 18 years old who underwent elective isolated primary AVR with standard stented AV prosthesis at the Institute for Cardiovascular Diseases “Dedinje” between January 2019 and December 2019. Reintervention, emergencies, combined surgical interventions, and patients with sutureless valves were excluded. In both MI-AVR and C-AVR, mechanical valve implantation contributed to overall reduction of hospital costs with equal efficacy. The cost-effectiveness ratio indicated that C-AVR is cheaper and yielded a better clinical outcome with mechanical valve implantation (67.17 vs. 69.5). In biological valve implantation, MI-AVR was superior. MI-AVR patients had statistically significantly higher LVEF and a lower Euro SCORE than C-AVR patients (Mann–Whitney U-test, p = 0.002 and p = 0.002, respectively). There is a slight advantage to MI-AVR vs. C-AVR, since it costs EUR 9.44 more to address complications that may arise. Complications (mortality, early reoperation, cerebrovascular insult, pacemaker implantation, atrial fibrillation, AV block, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, wound infection) were less frequent in the MI-AVR, making MI-AVR more economically justified than C-AVR (18% vs. 22.1%).
Invasive pituitary adenomas can infiltrate the dura mater, sphenoid sinus, or cranial bone. Endoscopic transsphenoidal sinus surgery is considered the standard of care; however, several potential complications must be noted. These complications can include cerebrospinal fluid leaks, infection, bleeding, optic nerve damage, and endocrinological complications such as diabetes insipidus. We present a case of a 69-year-old female with multiple recurrent invasive pituitary adenomas who has previously undergone 5 transsphenoidal procedures. Intraoperatively, the patient suffered from a left-sided carotid artery injury that was repaired with a muscle graft. Management of carotid artery injury during transsphenoidal surgery is optimized in a step-by-step approach which includes early recognition of the injury, briefing the surgical team, immediate control using compression, use of additional tissue graft for wound repair, and postoperative care. Through the use of the approach mentioned above, we were able to control the complication successfully.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.