Search

Background: Poland syndrome (OMIM: 173800) is a disorder in which affected individuals are born with missing or underdeveloped muscles on one side of the body, resulting in abnormalities that can affect the chest, breast, shoulder, arm, and hand. The extent and severity of the abnormalities vary among affected individuals., Main Body: The aim of this work is to provide recommendations for the diagnosis and management of people affected by Poland syndrome based on evidence from literature and experience of health professionals from different medical backgrounds who have followed for several years affected subjects. The literature search was performed in the second half of 2019. Original papers, meta-analyses, reviews, books and guidelines were reviewed and final recommendations were reached by consensus., Conclusion: Being Poland syndrome a rare syndrome most recommendations here presented are good clinical practice based on the consensus of the participant experts.

Background: Poland Syndrome (PS) is a rare congenital malformation involving functional and aesthetic impairments. Early diagnosis and timely therapeutic approaches play an important role in improving the quality of life of patients and kindred. This study aims to explore healthcare experiences of the diagnosis of patients affected by PS and to investigate the factors associated with diagnostic delay in Italy., Results: Seventy-two patients affected by PS were asked to fill in a self- administered questionnaire on: a) diagnostic path; b) perceived quality of care received after diagnosis; c) knowledge of the rights and the socio-economic hardships related to their disease; d) evaluation of the integration of various professional skills involved in the diagnostic and therapeutic approach; e) perception of the social support provided by the Italian Association of Poland Syndrome (AISP). The average age at diagnosis was around 14 years; diagnosis was made at birth in only 31.58% of cases. Although typical symptomatology had appeared on average at an early age (4 months), only 23 patients (40.35%) received an early diagnosis (within the first year of life). Just over half of the patients (n = 30) were diagnosed in their region of origin, while 27 were diagnosed elsewhere. Furthermore, 12.28% were self-diagnoses. Among the patients who were diagnosed outside their region, 15 (88.24%) stated they had foregone some visits or treatments owing to costs and/or organizational issues., Conclusions: An analysis of the patients' experiences highlights several gaps and a lack of homogeneity in the diagnostic and therapeutic follow-up of PS patients in Italy. A specific national diagnostic and therapeutic path is essential to guarantee patients complete and appropriate health services, compliant with the ethical principles of non-discrimination, justice and empathy. Implementation of an effective information and research network and empowerment of patients' associations are necessary conditions to encourage clinical collaboration and improve the quality of life of people living with rare diseases.

Background: Staphylococcus epidermidis and S. aureus have been identified as the most common bacteria responsible for sub-clinical and overt breast implant infections and their ability to form biofilm on the implant as been reported as the essential factor in the development of this type of infections. Biofilm formation is a complex process with the participation of several distinct molecules, whose relative importance in different clinical settings has not yet been fully elucidated. To our knowledge this is the first study aimed at characterizing isolates causing breast peri-implant infections., Results: Thirteen S. aureus and seven S. epidermidis causing breast peri-implant infections were studied. Using the broth microdilution method and the E-test, the majority of the strains were susceptible to all antibiotics tested. Methicillin resistance was detected in two S. epidermidis. All strains had different RAPD profiles and were able to produce biofilms in microtitre plate assays but, while all S. aureus carried and were able to express icaA and icaD genes, this was only true for one S. epidermidis. Biofilm development was glucose- and NaCl-induced (5 S. aureus and 1 S. epidermidis) or glucose-induced (the remaining strains). Proteinase K and sodium metaperiodate treatment had different effects on biofilms dispersion revealing that the strains studied were able to produce chemically different types of extracellular matrix mediating biofilm formation. All S. aureus strains harboured and expressed the atlA, clfA, FnA, eno and cna genes and the majority also carried and expressed the sasG (10/13), ebpS (10/13) genes. All S. epidermidis strains harboured and expressed the atlE, aae, embp genes, and the majority (six strains) also carried and expressed the fbe, aap genes. Genes for S. aureus capsular types 5 and 8 were almost equally distributed. The only leukotoxin genes detected were lukE/lukD (6/13)., Conclusions: S. aureus and S. epidermidis breast peri-implant infections are caused by heterogeneous strains with different biofilm development mechanisms. Since the collagen adhesin (cna) gene is not ubiquitously distributed among S. aureus, this protein could have an important role in the cause of breast peri-implant infections.