Search

O domicílio é inviolável segundo a Constituição Federal e o crime do artigo 33 da Lei 11.343/06 é uma realidade em todo o país. Sendo considerado um crime permanente, discute-se a legalidade do flagrante que viola o domicílio nos delitos de tráfico na Comarca de Montenegro/RS. Essa pesquisa tem como objetivo analisar as decisões proferidas na comarca mencionada a respeito da alegação de nulidade por violação do domicílio em casos atendidos pela Defensoria Pública no segundo semestre do ano de 2021 em comparação com a jurisprudência firmada pelo STJ no REsp 1.865.363. A pesquisa tem caráter qualitativo, descritivo e documental, metodologia pela qual foram analisados 35 processos de tráfico de drogas atendidos pela Defensoria Pública no segundo semestre de 2021, com o intuito de apurar o deferimento das alegações de nulidade, os argumentos utilizados pelo juízo em caso de indeferimento e os bairros em que ocorreram os flagrantes. Após, foi realizada a comparação das decisões com a mencionada jurisprudência e uma análise crítica apurando aspectos da política criminal de drogas. Em 11 processos foi arguida a nulidade pela violação do domicílio. Em todas as oportunidades a nulidade foi indeferida. Todos os indeferimentos tiveram como fundamentação a jurisprudência do TJ-RS com relação à autorização do ingresso policial em caso de crime permanente. As invasões de domicílio ocorreram em bairros em situação de vulnerabilidade. Palavras-chave: Tráfico de Drogas; Inviolabilidade do Domicílio; Política Criminal; Nulidade; Montenegro/RS;

Introduction: Penile cancer is rare, accounting for less than 1% of all male cancers in industrialized countries. It is most common in areas of high prevalence of HPV, being a third of cases attributed to the carcinogenic effect of HPV. Tumour cells infected with HPV overexpress p16INK4a, as such p16INK4a has been used as a surrogate of HPV infections. Objective: To evaluate the prognostic factor of p16INK4a overexpression in penile cancer. Methods: Retrospective analysis of patients diagnosed with penile cancer, submitted to surgery in a Portuguese Oncological Institution in the last 20 years (n = 35). Histological review of surgical pieces and immunohistochemical identification of p16INK4a. Relation between p16INK4a and the following factors were studied: age, histological subtype, tumour dimensions, grade, TNM stage, perineural invasion, perivascular invasion, disease free survival (DFS) and cancer specific survival (CSS). Results: p16INK4a was positive in 8 patients (22.9%). Identification of p16INK4a did not correlate with none of the histopathological factors. In this work we identified a better DFS and CSS in patients positive for p16INK4a (DFS at 36 months was 100.0% vs. 66.7%; CSS at 36 months was 100.0% vs. 70.4%), although without statistical significance (p > 0.05). In multivariate analysis of histopathological factors studied, only N staging correlated with DFS and CSS (p = 0.017 and p = 0.014, respectively). Discussion: the percentage of cases positive for p16INK4a is smaller than the one found in literature, which can suggest a less relevant part of HPV infection in the oncogenesis of penile cancer in the studied population. Identification of p16INK4a did not relate with other clinicopathological factors. Tendency for a more favourable prognosis in patients with p16INK4a agrees with results found in literature. The most relevant factor for prognosis is nodal staging. Conclusions: penile cancer positive for p16INK4a shows a trend for better survival, although the most relevant factor is nodal staging.

Introduction: Patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa) are active participants in the choice of treatment. Objectives: To access the effects of social and demographic factors in the choice of treatment in cases of localized PCa, in a Portuguese population. Methods: Identification of all patients with the diagnosis of localized PCa in the last four years in an oncological centre. Evaluation of the effects of sociodemographic factors (age, profession, literacy, marital status, district and number of inhabitants of the place of residence) in the choice of treatment. Results: 300 patients with localized PCa were evaluated: 17.3% (n = 52) opted for radical prostatectomy (RP); 39,3% had (n = 118) external radiotherapy; brachytherapy in 29.3% (n = 88) and other options (active surveillance, cryotherapy and hormonal therapy) in 14.1% (n = 42). In relation to surgical treatment (RP) the following results were obtained: a) > 70 years: 3.9% (n = 5); ≤ 70 years: 27.5% (n = 47), p < 0.001; b) primary sector: 10.3% (n = 3); secondary sector: 16.2% (n = 27); tertiary sector: 24.1% (n = 21); quaternary sector: 8.3% (n = 1), p = 0.296; c) marital status married: 17.9% (n = 47); single: 0% (n = 0); divorced: 25.0% (n = 5); widow: 0% (n = 0), p = 0.734; d) residency in a city: 14.1% (n = 13); city > 4000 habitants: 22.7% (n = 15); city ≤ 4000 habitants: 16.9% (n = 24), p = 0.701. Using multinomial regression with age (p = 0.001), district (p = 0.035), marital status (p = 0.027) and profession (0.179), this model explained 17.2%-28.4% of therapeutic choices (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The main socioeconomical factor that influence treatment choice was age. Unmarried patients over 70 years choose less radical prostatectomy. Other sociodemographic factors have minor influence in the choice of the treatment.

Introduction: Prostatic multiparametric magnetic resonance (mpMRI) allows for guided prostate biopsy (PB). Objective: To evaluate localization agreement between mpMRI lesions and histology obtained by cognitive PB and radical prostatectomy (RP) surgical specimen (SS). Methods: Out of 115 consecutive cognitive biopsied patients, 37 with positive PB were studied. Sample was characterized regarding age, prostatic volume, PI-RADS, location of lesion on mpMRI, lesion dimension, total number of fragments obtain by PB, number of fragments directed to the lesion, number of fragments with prostatic adenocarcinoma (PCa) and ISUP classification. The relationship between mpMRI and SS piece was analysed in 15 patients who underwent RP. Results: Regarding agreement between mpMRI and PB, agreement of location was observed in 26 (70.3%); 7 (18.9%) presented PCa positive fragments in the suspected zone plus others in the same lobe; 3 (8.1%) in the suspected zone plus the contralateral lobe and 1 (2.7%) had no PCa in the suspected zone but had bilateral PCa. The total number of fragments with PCa was lower in cases with agreement between mpMRI and PB (p < 0.05). Regarding agreement between mpMRI and SS, 5 cases (33.3%) presented the same location as described by mpMRI, 5 (33.3%) showed ipsilateral lesions in other zones of the prostate; 4 (26.7%) presented extensive bilateral lesions on all prostate zones and 1 (6.7%) showed previously unknown contralateral lesions. None of the factors studied related mpMRI and RP (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Localization agreement of mpMRI vs PB and mpMRI vs SS was present in 26/37 (70.3%) and 5/15 (33.3%), respectively. That suggests the existence of other lesions (multifocality) not identified on mpMRI.