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 : Ali Guner (검색결과 8 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
Advantages of Splenic Hilar Lymph Node Dissection in Proximal Gastric Cancer Surgery
Ali Guner,형우진 대한위암학회 2020 Journal of gastric cancer Vol. No.
Gastrectomy with lymph node dissection remains the gold standard for curative treatment of gastric cancer. Dissection of splenic hilar lymph nodes has been included as a part of D2 lymph node dissection for proximal gastric cancer. Previously, pancreatico-splenectomy has been performed for dissecting splenic hilar lymph nodes, followed by pancreas-preserving splenectomy and spleen-preserving lymphadenectomy. However, the necessity of routine splenectomy or splenic hilar lymph node dissection has been under debate due to the increased morbidity caused by splenectomy and the poor prognostic feature of splenic hilar lymph node metastasis. In contrast, the relatively high incidence of splenic hilar lymph node metastasis, survival advantage, and therapeutic value of splenic hilar lymph node dissection in some patient subgroups, as well as the effective use of novel technologies, still supports the necessity and applicability of splenic hilar lymph node dissection. In this review, we aimed to evaluate the need for splenic hilar lymph node dissection and suggest the subgroup of patients with favorable outcomes.
-
Advantages of Splenic Hilar Lymph Node Dissection in Proximal Gastric Cancer Surgery
Guner, Ali,Hyung, Woo Jin The Korean Gastric Cancer Association 2020 Journal of gastric cancer Vol. No.
Gastrectomy with lymph node dissection remains the gold standard for curative treatment of gastric cancer. Dissection of splenic hilar lymph nodes has been included as a part of D2 lymph node dissection for proximal gastric cancer. Previously, pancreatico-splenectomy has been performed for dissecting splenic hilar lymph nodes, followed by pancreas-preserving splenectomy and spleen-preserving lymphadenectomy. However, the necessity of routine splenectomy or splenic hilar lymph node dissection has been under debate due to the increased morbidity caused by splenectomy and the poor prognostic feature of splenic hilar lymph node metastasis. In contrast, the relatively high incidence of splenic hilar lymph node metastasis, survival advantage, and therapeutic value of splenic hilar lymph node dissection in some patient subgroups, as well as the effective use of novel technologies, still supports the necessity and applicability of splenic hilar lymph node dissection. In this review, we aimed to evaluate the need for splenic hilar lymph node dissection and suggest the subgroup of patients with favorable outcomes.
-
Safe Discharge Criteria After Curative Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer
Guner, Ali,Kim, Ki Yoon,Park, Sung Hyun,Cho, Minah,Kim, Yoo Min,Hyung, Woo Jin,Kim, Hyoung-Il The Korean Gastric Cancer Association 2022 Journal of gastric cancer Vol.22 No.-
Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the relationship between clinical and laboratory parameters and complication status to predict which patients can be safely discharged from the hospital on the third postoperative day (POD). Materials and Methods: Data from a prospectively maintained database of 2,110 consecutive patients with gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent curative surgery were reviewed. The third POD vital signs, laboratory data, and details of the course after surgery were collected. Patients with grade II or higher complications after the third POD were considered unsuitable for early discharge. The performance metrics were calculated for all algorithm parameters. The proposed algorithm was tested using a validation dataset of consecutive patients from the same center. Results: Of 1,438 patients in the study cohort, 142 (9.9%) were considered unsuitable for early discharge. C-reactive protein level, body temperature, pulse rate, and neutrophil count had good performance metrics and were determined to be independent prognostic factors. An algorithm consisting of these 4 parameters had a negative predictive value (NPV) of 95.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.2-97.3), sensitivity of 80.3% (95% CI, 72.8-86.5), and specificity of 51.1% (95% CI, 48.3-53.8). Only 28 (1.9%) patients in the study cohort were classified as false negatives. In the validation dataset, the NPV was 93.7%, sensitivity was 66%, and 3.3% (17/512) of patients were classified as false negatives. Conclusions: Simple clinical and laboratory parameters obtained on the third POD can be used when making decisions regarding the safe early discharge of patients who underwent gastrectomy.
-
Biomarkers for Evaluating the Inflammation Status in Patients with Cancer
Guner, Ali,Kim, Hyoung-Il The Korean Gastric Cancer Association 2019 Journal of gastric cancer Vol.19 No.3
Inflammation can be a causative factor for carcinogenesis or can result from a consequence of cancer progression. Moreover, cancer therapeutic interventions can also induce an inflammatory response. Various inflammatory parameters are used to assess the inflammatory status during cancer treatment. It is important to select the most optimal biomarker among these parameters. Additionally, suitable biomarkers must be examined if there are no known parameters. We briefly reviewed the published literature for the use of inflammatory parameters in the treatment of patients with cancer. Most studies on inflammation evaluated the correlation between host characteristics, effect of interventions, and clinical outcomes. Additionally, the levels of C-reactive protein, albumin, lymphocytes, and platelets were the most commonly used laboratory parameters, either independently or in combination with other laboratory parameters and clinical characteristics. Furthermore, the immune parameters are classically examined using flow cytometry, immunohistochemical staining, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay techniques. However, gene expression profiling can aid in assessing the overall peri-interventional immune status. The checklists of guidelines, such as STAndards for Reporting of Diagnostic accuracy and REporting recommendations for tumor MARKer prognostic studies should be considered when designing studies to investigate the inflammatory parameters. Finally, the data should be interpreted after adjusting for clinically important variables, such as age and cancer stage.
-
-
Safe Discharge Criteria After Curative Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer
Guner Ali,Kim Ki Yoon,Park Sung Hyun,Cho Minah,Kim Yoo Min,Hyung Woo Jin,Kim Hyoung-Il 대한위암학회 2022 Journal of gastric cancer Vol.22 No.4
Purpose This study aimed to investigate the relationship between clinical and laboratory parameters and complication status to predict which patients can be safely discharged from the hospital on the third postoperative day (POD). Materials and Methods Data from a prospectively maintained database of 2,110 consecutive patients with gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent curative surgery were reviewed. The third POD vital signs, laboratory data, and details of the course after surgery were collected. Patients with grade II or higher complications after the third POD were considered unsuitable for early discharge. The performance metrics were calculated for all algorithm parameters. The proposed algorithm was tested using a validation dataset of consecutive patients from the same center. Results Of 1,438 patients in the study cohort, 142 (9.9%) were considered unsuitable for early discharge. C-reactive protein level, body temperature, pulse rate, and neutrophil count had good performance metrics and were determined to be independent prognostic factors. An algorithm consisting of these 4 parameters had a negative predictive value (NPV) of 95.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.2–97.3), sensitivity of 80.3% (95% CI, 72.8–86.5), and specificity of 51.1% (95% CI, 48.3–53.8). Only 28 (1.9%) patients in the study cohort were classified as false negatives. In the validation dataset, the NPV was 93.7%, sensitivity was 66%, and 3.3% (17/512) of patients were classified as false negatives. Conclusions Simple clinical and laboratory parameters obtained on the third POD can be used when making decisions regarding the safe early discharge of patients who underwent gastrectomy. Purpose This study aimed to investigate the relationship between clinical and laboratory parameters and complication status to predict which patients can be safely discharged from the hospital on the third postoperative day (POD). Materials and Methods Data from a prospectively maintained database of 2,110 consecutive patients with gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent curative surgery were reviewed. The third POD vital signs, laboratory data, and details of the course after surgery were collected. Patients with grade II or higher complications after the third POD were considered unsuitable for early discharge. The performance metrics were calculated for all algorithm parameters. The proposed algorithm was tested using a validation dataset of consecutive patients from the same center. Results Of 1,438 patients in the study cohort, 142 (9.9%) were considered unsuitable for early discharge. C-reactive protein level, body temperature, pulse rate, and neutrophil count had good performance metrics and were determined to be independent prognostic factors. An algorithm consisting of these 4 parameters had a negative predictive value (NPV) of 95.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.2–97.3), sensitivity of 80.3% (95% CI, 72.8–86.5), and specificity of 51.1% (95% CI, 48.3–53.8). Only 28 (1.9%) patients in the study cohort were classified as false negatives. In the validation dataset, the NPV was 93.7%, sensitivity was 66%, and 3.3% (17/512) of patients were classified as false negatives. Conclusions Simple clinical and laboratory parameters obtained on the third POD can be used when making decisions regarding the safe early discharge of patients who underwent gastrectomy.
-
Biomarkers for Evaluating the Inflammation Status in Patients with Cancer
김형일,Ali Guner 대한위암학회 2019 Journal of gastric cancer Vol.19 No.3
Inflammation can be a causative factor for carcinogenesis or can result from a consequenceof cancer progression. Moreover, cancer therapeutic interventions can also induce aninflammatory response. Various inflammatory parameters are used to assess the inflammatorystatus during cancer treatment. It is important to select the most optimal biomarker amongthese parameters. Additionally, suitable biomarkers must be examined if there are noknown parameters. We briefly reviewed the published literature for the use of inflammatoryparameters in the treatment of patients with cancer. Most studies on inflammation evaluatedthe correlation between host characteristics, effect of interventions, and clinical outcomes. Additionally, the levels of C-reactive protein, albumin, lymphocytes, and platelets were themost commonly used laboratory parameters, either independently or in combination withother laboratory parameters and clinical characteristics. Furthermore, the immune parametersare classically examined using flow cytometry, immunohistochemical staining, and enzymelinkedimmunosorbent assay techniques. However, gene expression profiling can aid inassessing the overall peri-interventional immune status. The checklists of guidelines, such asSTAndards for Reporting of Diagnostic accuracy and REporting recommendations for tumorMARKer prognostic studies should be considered when designing studies to investigate theinflammatory parameters. Finally, the data should be interpreted after adjusting for clinicallyimportant variables, such as age and cancer stage.
-
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
