Você pesquisou por y - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
You searched for:"Fernando Monteiro Aarestrup"
We found (3) results for your search.
, , , , Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2022;44(6):602-608
, , , , The aim of the present study is to list the published clinical trials on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines, to describe the mechanism of action of the identified vaccines, and to identify protocols regarding safety, status, and prioritization of cancer patients for vaccination.
This is a systematic review with a limited literature search conducted by an information specialist; key resources such as PubMed and websites of major cancer organizations were searched. The main search terms were COVID-19, vaccination, cancer, and breast and gynecological cancers.
Cancer patients infected with the new coronavirus are at high risk of complications and death, but we still know little about the risks and benefits of vaccination for COVID-19 in these patients. In an ideal scenario, all cancer patients should have their immunization status updated before beginning treatment, but this is not always possible.
Patients with breast or gynecological cancers who are receiving treatment or are in the 5-year posttreatment period should be included in the priority group for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2022;44(6):602-608
, , , , The aim of the present study is to list the published clinical trials on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines, to describe the mechanism of action of the identified vaccines, and to identify protocols regarding safety, status, and prioritization of cancer patients for vaccination.
This is a systematic review with a limited literature search conducted by an information specialist; key resources such as PubMed and websites of major cancer organizations were searched. The main search terms were COVID-19, vaccination, cancer, and breast and gynecological cancers.
Cancer patients infected with the new coronavirus are at high risk of complications and death, but we still know little about the risks and benefits of vaccination for COVID-19 in these patients. In an ideal scenario, all cancer patients should have their immunization status updated before beginning treatment, but this is not always possible.
Patients with breast or gynecological cancers who are receiving treatment or are in the 5-year posttreatment period should be included in the priority group for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2018;40(4):203-208
To evaluate the prevalence of adherence to screening methods for breast and cervical cancer in patients attended at a university hospital and to investigate whether knowing someone with breast cancer, moreover belonging to the patient’s family, affects the adherence to the screening recommendations.
This was a cross-sectional and quantitative study. A structured interview was applied to a sample of 820 women, between 20 and 69 years old, who attended a university hospital in the city of Juiz de for a, MG, Brazil. For the analysis, the chi-square test was used to assess possible associations between the variables, and the significance level was set at p-value ≤ 0.05 for a confidence interval (CI) of 95%.
More than 95.0% of the sample performed mammography and cervical cytology exam; 62.9% reported knowing someone who has or had breast cancer, and this group was more likely to perform breast self-examination (64.9%; odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.12-2.00), clinical breast examination (91.5%; OR 2.11; 95% CI 1.37-3.36), breast ultrasound (32.9%; OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.30-2.51), and to have had an appointment with a breast specialist (28.5%; OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.38-2.82).Women with family history of breast cancer showed higher propensity to perform breast self-examination (71.0%; OR 1.53 95% CI 1.04-2.26).
There was high adherence to the recommended screening practices; knowing someone with breast cancer might make women more sensitive to this issue as they were more likely to undergo methods which are not recommended for the screening of the general population, such as breast ultrasound and specialist consultation; family history is possibly an additional cause of concern.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2018;40(4):203-208
To evaluate the prevalence of adherence to screening methods for breast and cervical cancer in patients attended at a university hospital and to investigate whether knowing someone with breast cancer, moreover belonging to the patient’s family, affects the adherence to the screening recommendations.
This was a cross-sectional and quantitative study. A structured interview was applied to a sample of 820 women, between 20 and 69 years old, who attended a university hospital in the city of Juiz de for a, MG, Brazil. For the analysis, the chi-square test was used to assess possible associations between the variables, and the significance level was set at p-value ≤ 0.05 for a confidence interval (CI) of 95%.
More than 95.0% of the sample performed mammography and cervical cytology exam; 62.9% reported knowing someone who has or had breast cancer, and this group was more likely to perform breast self-examination (64.9%; odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.12-2.00), clinical breast examination (91.5%; OR 2.11; 95% CI 1.37-3.36), breast ultrasound (32.9%; OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.30-2.51), and to have had an appointment with a breast specialist (28.5%; OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.38-2.82).Women with family history of breast cancer showed higher propensity to perform breast self-examination (71.0%; OR 1.53 95% CI 1.04-2.26).
There was high adherence to the recommended screening practices; knowing someone with breast cancer might make women more sensitive to this issue as they were more likely to undergo methods which are not recommended for the screening of the general population, such as breast ultrasound and specialist consultation; family history is possibly an additional cause of concern.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2012;34(6):268-273
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032012000600005
PURPOSE: To evaluate the correlation between maternal waist circumference measured before the 12th week of gestation and serum leptin levels during pregnancy, as well as to compare the leptin levels of women with and without abdominal obesity diagnosed in early pregnancy. METHODS: Prospective study including 40 pregnant women receiving low-risk prenatal care, older than 20 years, nonsmokers, with singleton pregnancies and without chronic disease. Waist circumference was measured before the 12th week and serum leptin levels were measured between the 9th and 12th, 25th and 28th and 34th and 37th weeks of gestation. According to waist circumference measurement, the cohort was divided into two groups: with and without abdominal obesity. The Mann-Whitney and χ² tests were used to assess the differences between groups. The Pearson correlation coeffient was used to assess the association between waist circumference and serum leptin levels during pregnancy. The level of significance was set at p<0.05. RESULTS: The mean weight and body mass index of patients with abdominal obesity (74.4±11.0 kg/28.9±4.1) was higher than that of patients without abdominal obesity (55.6±5.9 kg/21.1±2.4) (p=0.001). The mean leptin levels in pregnant patients with abdominal obesity (41.9±3.5 ng/mL) was higher than in patients without abdominal obesity (23.6±2.7 ng/mL) (p<0.0002). A positive correlation was obtained between the waist circumference measured during the same period and the mean serum leptin levels (r=0.7; p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Waist circumference measured before the 12th week of pregnancy is a valid and simple method to predict the serum leptin levels throughout pregnancy. Pregnant women with abdominal obesity diagnosed before 12th week have higher mean serum leptin levels during pregnancy than those without abdominal obesity.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2012;34(6):268-273
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032012000600005
PURPOSE: To evaluate the correlation between maternal waist circumference measured before the 12th week of gestation and serum leptin levels during pregnancy, as well as to compare the leptin levels of women with and without abdominal obesity diagnosed in early pregnancy. METHODS: Prospective study including 40 pregnant women receiving low-risk prenatal care, older than 20 years, nonsmokers, with singleton pregnancies and without chronic disease. Waist circumference was measured before the 12th week and serum leptin levels were measured between the 9th and 12th, 25th and 28th and 34th and 37th weeks of gestation. According to waist circumference measurement, the cohort was divided into two groups: with and without abdominal obesity. The Mann-Whitney and χ² tests were used to assess the differences between groups. The Pearson correlation coeffient was used to assess the association between waist circumference and serum leptin levels during pregnancy. The level of significance was set at p<0.05. RESULTS: The mean weight and body mass index of patients with abdominal obesity (74.4±11.0 kg/28.9±4.1) was higher than that of patients without abdominal obesity (55.6±5.9 kg/21.1±2.4) (p=0.001). The mean leptin levels in pregnant patients with abdominal obesity (41.9±3.5 ng/mL) was higher than in patients without abdominal obesity (23.6±2.7 ng/mL) (p<0.0002). A positive correlation was obtained between the waist circumference measured during the same period and the mean serum leptin levels (r=0.7; p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Waist circumference measured before the 12th week of pregnancy is a valid and simple method to predict the serum leptin levels throughout pregnancy. Pregnant women with abdominal obesity diagnosed before 12th week have higher mean serum leptin levels during pregnancy than those without abdominal obesity.
