Browsing by Subject "retrospective"

Sort by: Order: Results:

Now showing items 1-2 of 2
  • Mende, Anna-Maria (Helsingin yliopisto, 2020)
    Ovarian cancer is the fifth most common cause of cancer death among women in Europe; high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSC) is the most common subtype of ovarian cancer. This report describes the construction and preliminary analysis of a retrospective cohort of HGSC patients. Tissue samples were obtained from Helsinki Biobank, and clinical data was retrieved from several electronic data bases as well as from the paper archives of the HUS Women’s hospital. Over 900 patients were identified for potential inclusion in the cohort. The process of confirming diagnoses is still ongoing. Challenges with the collection and categorization of clinical data are reported and possible solutions discussed. As the confirmation of which patients will be included in the final cohort is not yet complete, analyses in this report are limited to some preliminary descriptions. These initial findings seem to be in concordance with other reports: patients with stage I or II disease and/or complete surgical cytoreduction (R0) have a better 5-year overall survival than those with stage III or IV disease and/or suboptimal surgical outcome. Once the cohort is ready, it will be a unique tool for studying the biology of high-grade ovarian carcinoma.
  • Hackenberg, T.; Mentula, P.; Leppaniemi, A.; Sallinen, V. (2017)
    Background and Aims: The laparoscopic approach has been increasingly used to treat adhesive small-bowel obstruction. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of a laparoscopic versus an open approach for adhesive small-bowel obstruction. Material and Methods: Data were retrospectively collected on patients who had surgery for adhesive small-bowel obstruction at a single academic center between January 2010 and December 2012. Patients with a contraindication for the laparoscopic approach were excluded. A propensity score was used to match patients in the laparoscopic and open surgery groups based on their preoperative parameters. Results: A total of 25 patients underwent laparoscopic adhesiolysis and 67 patients open adhesiolysis. The open adhesiolysis group had more suspected bowel strangulations and more previous abdominal surgeries than the laparoscopic adhesiolysis group. Severe complication rate (Clavien-Dindo 3 or higher) was 0% in the laparoscopic adhesiolysis group versus 14% in the open adhesiolysis group (p = 0.052). Twenty-five propensity score-matched patients from the open adhesiolysis group were similar to laparoscopic adhesiolysis group patients with regard to their preoperative parameters. Length of hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic adhesiolysis group compared to the propensity score-matched open adhesiolysis group (6.0 vs 10.0 days, p = 0.037), but no differences were found in severe complications between the laparoscopic adhesiolysis and propensity score-matched open adhesiolysis groups (0% vs 4%, p = 0.31). Conclusion: Patients selected to be operated by the open approach had higher preoperative morbidity than the ones selected for the laparoscopic approach. After matching for this disparity, the laparoscopic approach was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay without differences in complications. The laparoscopic approach may be a preferable approach in selected patients.