Search

This review aimed to determine which are the indexes for early detection and evaluation of clinical and physiological deterioration of traumatized patients. A Scoping Review according to the methods proposed by Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) was performed from February 2018 to December 2018 on LILACS (Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde), National Library of Medicine (PubMed), and SCOPUS databases. Sixty-two studies were included, of which 43 evaluated patients with general trauma. A variety of physiological variables, such as Glasgow Coma Score, Glucose, Days in the Intensive Care Unit, Lactate, and predictor indexes - Injury Severity Score (ISS), Trauma Injury Severity Score (TRISS), Revisited Trauma Score (RTS), and APACHE II were identified. The values observed in the studies among patients were compared to the ones determined by the basic literature, being called Critical Values (CV). The group of gravity indexes, besides clinical and regulatory protocols, found in this review are the solidification of the healthcare process involving the traumatized patient’s responses to the actions of the healthcare team. The analysis of these indexes must be emphasized to determine, with greater reliability, the prognosis of the patient. With these data, it may be possible to effectively predict mortality rates.

PURPOSEA group of international urology and medical oncology experts developed and completed a survey on prostate cancer (PCa) in developing countries. The results are reviewed and summarized, and recommendations on consensus statements for very low-, low-, and intermediate-risk PCa focused on developing countries were developed.METHODSA panel of experts developed more than 300 survey questions of which 66 questions concern the principal areas of interest of this paper: very low, low, and intermediate risk of PCa in developing countries. A larger panel of 99 international multidisciplinary cancer experts voted on these questions to create the recommendations for treatment and follow-up for very low-, low-, and intermediate-risk PCa in areas of limited resources discussed in this manuscript.RESULTSThe panel voted publicly but anonymously on the predefined questions. Each question was deemed consensus if 75% or more of the full panel had selected a particular answer. These answers are based on panelist opinion not a literature review or meta-analysis. For questions that refer to an area of limited resources, the recommendations consider cost-effectiveness and the possible therapies with easier and greater access. Each question had five to seven relevant answers including two nonanswers. The results were tabulated in real time.CONCLUSIONThe voting results and recommendations presented in this document can be used by physicians to support management for very low, low, and intermediate risk of PCa in areas of limited resources. Individual clinical decision making should be supported by available data; however, as guidelines for treatment for very low, low, and intermediate risk of PCa in developing countries have not been developed, this document will serve as a point of reference when confronted with this disease.

Background: many doubts about the infection of SARS-CoV-2 were raised, such as sexual transmission, sterility, and changes in fertility procedures; however, information is not clearly stated and organized. Purpose: to review and summarize scientific evidence on detection of SARS-CoV-2 in semen samples of Covid-19 patients. Methods: literature search in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Medline and Embase databases, and followed Scoping Review protocol defined by Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) after the guiding question “Is it possible to detect SARS-CoV-2 in the semen of adult patients with a confirmed diagnosis of Covid-19?” Results: 287 studies were identified, and, after discerning analysis, 9 studies published in the English language were selected. Three researchers analyzed the studies for SARS-CoV-2 presence in the seminal fluid, patients’ severity, days since the onset of disease, diagnosis confirmation, semen collection method, viral analysis method, and sample numbers. Conclusions: it was not possible to find strong evidence to confirm the presence or absence of Covid-19 in the semen of adult patients. New studies on the subject should be better designed, taking into account the possible anatomical and functional conditions and changes of the male reproductive system during and after the infection by SARS-CoV-2.

This study aimed to compare the performance of Mobissom® portable bladder ultrasound equipment with tabletop ultrasound equipment to assess bladder urine volume. 192 images of 16 adult patients who underwent the exam were analyzed. The bladder volumes obtained by the portable equipment were archived in the form of an image and, later, compared with the ultrasound report of the evaluation performed by a tabletop ultrasound device. The results obtained were compared using the paired t test and the differences were graphically distributed using the Bland & Altmann method. In the overall result, there were no significant differences between the two devices. It is concluded that the equipment, despite the limitation in the visualization of other organs, is easy to use and relevant for bedside assessment.

PURPOSETo generate and present the survey results on critical issues relevant to screening, diagnosis, and staging tools for prostate cancer (PCa) focused on developing countries.METHODSA total of 36 of 300 questions concern the main areas of interest of this paper: (1) screening, (2) diagnosis, and (3) staging for various risk levels of PCa in developing countries. A panel of 99 international multidisciplinary cancer experts voted on these questions to create recommendations for screening, diagnosing, and staging tools for PCa in areas of limited resources discussed in this manuscript.RESULTSThe panel voted publicly but anonymously on the predefined questions. Each question was deemed consensus if 75% or more of the full panel had selected a particular answer. These answers are based on panelist opinion not a literature review or meta-analysis. For questions that refer to an area of limited resources, the recommendations consider cost-effectiveness and the possible therapies with easier and greater access. Each question had five to seven relevant answers including two nonanswers. The results were tabulated in real time.CONCLUSIONThe voting results and recommendations presented in this document can be used by physicians to support the screening, diagnosis, and staging of PCa in areas of limited resources. Individual clinical decision making should be supported by available data; however, as guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and staging of PCa in developing countries have not been developed, this document will serve as a point of reference when confronted with this disease.