http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : Doluoglu, (검색결과 2 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
Muzaffer Eroglu,Omer Gokhan Doluoglu,Hasmet Sarici,Onur Telli,Berat Cem Ozgur,Selen Bozkurt 대한비뇨의학회 2014 Investigative and Clinical Urology Vol.55 No.6
Purpose: It is debated whether treatment delay worsens oncologic results in localizedprostate cancer (PCa). Few studies have focused on the role of a delay between the timeof biopsy and the time of surgery. Thus, we aimed to investigate the effect of the timeperiod between biopsy and surgery on Gleason score upgrading (GSU). Materials and Methods: A total of 290 patients who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomyin Ankara Training and Research Hospital were included in the study. Thebiopsy Gleason score, age, total prostate-specific antigen (PSA) value, prostate volumes,and PSA density (PSAD) were analyzed in all patients. The patients were dividedinto two groups: patients with GSU (group 1) and patients without GSU (group 2). Variables having a p-value of ≤0.05 in the univariate analysis were selected and thenevaluated by use of multivariate logistic regression models. Results were consideredsignificant at p<0.05. Results: GSU occurred in 121 of 290 patients (41.7%). The mean age of the patientswas 66.0±7.2 years in group 1 and 65.05±5.60 years in group 2 (p=0.18). The mean PSAvalues of groups 1 and 2 were 8.6±4.1 and 8.8±4.3 ng/dL, respectively. The mean prostatevolumes of groups 1 and 2 were 43.8±14.1 and 59.5±29.8 mL, respectively. ThePSAD of group 1 was significantly higher than that of group 2 (0.20 vs. 0.17, p=0.003). The mean time to surgery was shorter in group 2 (group 1, 52.2±22.6 days; group 2,45.3±15.5 days; p=0.004). According to the logistic regression, time from biopsy to surgeryis important in the prediction of GSU. Conclusions: We suggest that the time period between biopsy and surgery is a significantfactor that affects GSU in patients with clinically localized PCa.
-
Tumour Markers in Peritoneal Washing Fluid - Contribution to Cytology
Yildirim, Mustafa,Suren, Dinc,Yildiz, Mustafa,Alikanoglu, Arsenal Sezgin,Kaya, Vildan,Doluoglu, Suleyman Gunhan,Aydin, Ozgur,Yilmaz, Necat,Sezer, Cem,Karaca, Mehmet Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention 2013 Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention Vol.14 No.2
Background: Peritoneal washing cytology (PWC) that shows the microscopic intra-peritoneal spread of gynaecologic cancers is not used in staging but is known as prognostic factor and effective in planning the intensity of the therapy. False negative or false positive results clearly affect the ability to make the best decision for therapy. In this study we assessed levels of tumour markers, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), cancer antigen 125 (CA-125) and carbohydrate antigen (CA19-9), in peritoneal washing fluid to establish any possible contribution to the peritoneal washing cytology in patients operated for gynaecologic cancer. Materials and Methods: Preoperative tumour markers were studied in serum of blood samples obtained from the patients for preoperative evaluation of a gynaecologic operation. In the same group peritoneal tumour markers were studied in the washing fluid obtained for intraoperative cytological evaluation. Results: This study included a total of 94 patients, 62 with malignant and 32 with benign histopathology. The sensitivity of the cytological examination was found to be 21% with a specificity of 100%. When evaluated with CEA the sensitivity of the cytological examination has increased to 37%. Conclusions: In addition to examination of PWC, the level of CEA, a tumour marker, in peritoneal washing fluid can make a diagnostic contribution. Determining the level of CEA in peritoneal washing fluid will be useful in the management of gynaecologic cancers.
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
