Você pesquisou por y - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
You searched for:"Liliana Aparecida Lucci de Angelo Andrade"
We found (2) results for your search.
, , , , , Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2020;42(9):555-561
, , , , , To evaluate the role of clinical features and preoperativemeasurement of cancer antigen 125 (CA125), human epididymis protein(HE4), and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) serum levels in women with benign and malignant non-epithelial ovarian tumors.
One hundred and nineteen consecutive women with germ cell, sex cordstromal, and ovarian leiomyomas were included in this study. The preoperative levels of biomarkers were measured, and then surgery and histopathological analysis were performed. Information about the treatment and disease recurrence were obtained from the medical files of patients.
Our sample included 71 women with germ cell tumors (64 benign and 7 malignant), 46 with sex cord-stromal tumors (32 benign and 14 malignant), and 2 with ovarian leiomyomas. Among benign germ cell tumors, 63 were mature teratomas, and, amongmalignant, fourwere immatureteratomas. Themost common tumors in the sex cordstromal group were fibromas (benign) and granulosa cell tumor (malignant). The biomarker serum levels were not different among benign andmalignant non-epithelial ovarian tumors. Fertility-sparing surgeries were performed in 5 (71.4%) women with malignant germ cell tumor. Eleven (78.6%) patients with malignant sex cord-stromal tumors were treated with fertility-sparing surgeries. Five women (71.4%) with germ cell tumors and only 1 (7.1%) with sex cord-stromal tumor were treated with chemotherapy. One woman with germ cell tumor recurred and died of the disease and one woman with sex cord-stromal tumor recurred.
Non-epithelial ovarian tumors were benign in the majority of cases, and the malignant caseswere diagnosed at initial stages with good prognosis. Themeasurements of CA125, HE4, and CEA serum levels were not useful in the preoperative diagnosis of these tumors.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2020;42(9):555-561
, , , , , To evaluate the role of clinical features and preoperativemeasurement of cancer antigen 125 (CA125), human epididymis protein(HE4), and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) serum levels in women with benign and malignant non-epithelial ovarian tumors.
One hundred and nineteen consecutive women with germ cell, sex cordstromal, and ovarian leiomyomas were included in this study. The preoperative levels of biomarkers were measured, and then surgery and histopathological analysis were performed. Information about the treatment and disease recurrence were obtained from the medical files of patients.
Our sample included 71 women with germ cell tumors (64 benign and 7 malignant), 46 with sex cord-stromal tumors (32 benign and 14 malignant), and 2 with ovarian leiomyomas. Among benign germ cell tumors, 63 were mature teratomas, and, amongmalignant, fourwere immatureteratomas. Themost common tumors in the sex cordstromal group were fibromas (benign) and granulosa cell tumor (malignant). The biomarker serum levels were not different among benign andmalignant non-epithelial ovarian tumors. Fertility-sparing surgeries were performed in 5 (71.4%) women with malignant germ cell tumor. Eleven (78.6%) patients with malignant sex cord-stromal tumors were treated with fertility-sparing surgeries. Five women (71.4%) with germ cell tumors and only 1 (7.1%) with sex cord-stromal tumor were treated with chemotherapy. One woman with germ cell tumor recurred and died of the disease and one woman with sex cord-stromal tumor recurred.
Non-epithelial ovarian tumors were benign in the majority of cases, and the malignant caseswere diagnosed at initial stages with good prognosis. Themeasurements of CA125, HE4, and CEA serum levels were not useful in the preoperative diagnosis of these tumors.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2017;39(3):123-127
Expectant follow-up for biopsy-proven cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 1 is the current recommendation for the management of this lesion. Nevertheless, the performance of the biopsy guided by colposcopy might not be optimal. Therefore, this study aimed to calculate the rate of underdiagnoses of more severe lesions in women with CIN 1 diagnosis and to evaluate whether age, lesion extent and biopsy site are factors associated with diagnostic failure.
Eighty women with a diagnosis of CIN 1 obtained by colposcopy-guided biopsy were selected for this study. These women were herein submitted to large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ). The prevalence of lesions more severe than CIN 1 was calculated, and the histological diagnoses of the LLETZ specimens were grouped into two categories: "CIN 1 or less" and "CIN 2 or worse."
The prevalence of lesions diagnosed as CIN 2 or worse in the LLETZ specimens was of 19% (15/80). Three women revealed CIN 3, and 1 woman revealed a sclerosing adenocarcinoma stage I-a, a rare type of malignant neoplasia of low proliferation, which was not detected by either colposcopy or previous biopsy. The underdiagnosis of CIN 2 was not associated with the women's age, lesion extension and biopsy site.
The standard methods used for the diagnosis of CIN 1 may underestimate the severity of the true lesion and, therefore, women undergoing expectant management must have an adequate follow-up.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2017;39(3):123-127
Expectant follow-up for biopsy-proven cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 1 is the current recommendation for the management of this lesion. Nevertheless, the performance of the biopsy guided by colposcopy might not be optimal. Therefore, this study aimed to calculate the rate of underdiagnoses of more severe lesions in women with CIN 1 diagnosis and to evaluate whether age, lesion extent and biopsy site are factors associated with diagnostic failure.
Eighty women with a diagnosis of CIN 1 obtained by colposcopy-guided biopsy were selected for this study. These women were herein submitted to large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ). The prevalence of lesions more severe than CIN 1 was calculated, and the histological diagnoses of the LLETZ specimens were grouped into two categories: "CIN 1 or less" and "CIN 2 or worse."
The prevalence of lesions diagnosed as CIN 2 or worse in the LLETZ specimens was of 19% (15/80). Three women revealed CIN 3, and 1 woman revealed a sclerosing adenocarcinoma stage I-a, a rare type of malignant neoplasia of low proliferation, which was not detected by either colposcopy or previous biopsy. The underdiagnosis of CIN 2 was not associated with the women's age, lesion extension and biopsy site.
The standard methods used for the diagnosis of CIN 1 may underestimate the severity of the true lesion and, therefore, women undergoing expectant management must have an adequate follow-up.