ORCID Profile
0000-0003-1711-7347
Current Organisations
Universidade de São Paulo
,
Universidade de São Paulo Faculdade de Medicina Hospital das Clínicas Instituto do Câncer
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 11-2017
DOI: 10.1093/BJA/AEX250
Abstract: Major abdominal oncology surgery is associated with substantial postoperative loss of functional capacity, and exercise may be an effective intervention to improve outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess efficacy, feasibility and safety of a supervised postoperative exercise programme. We performed a single-blind, parallel-arm, randomized trial in patients who underwent major abdominal oncology surgery in a tertiary university hospital. Patients were randomized to an early mobilization postoperative programme based on supervised aerobic exercise, resistance and flexibility training or to standard rehabilitation care. The primary outcome was inability to walk without human assistance at postoperative day 5 or hospital discharge. A total of 108 patients were enrolled, 54 into the early mobilization programme group and 54 into the standard rehabilitation care group. The incidence of the primary outcome was nine (16.7%) and 21 (38.9%), respectively (P=0.01), with an absolute risk reduction of 22.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.9-38.6] and a number needed to treat of 5 (95% CI 3-17). All patients in the intervention group were able to follow at least partially the exercise programme, although the performance among them was rather heterogeneous. There were no differences between groups regarding clinical outcomes or complications related to the exercises. An early postoperative mobilization programme based on supervised exercises seems to be safe and feasible and improves functional capacity in patients undergoing major elective abdominal oncology surgery. However, its impact on clinical outcomes is still unclear. NCT01693172.
Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Date: 2015
DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000000511
Abstract: Several studies have indicated that a restrictive erythrocyte transfusion strategy is as safe as a liberal one in critically ill patients, but there is no clear evidence to support the superiority of any perioperative transfusion strategy in patients with cancer. In a randomized, controlled, parallel-group, double-blind (patients and outcome assessors) superiority trial in the intensive care unit of a tertiary oncology hospital, the authors evaluated whether a restrictive strategy of erythrocyte transfusion (transfusion when hemoglobin concentration & g/dl) was superior to a liberal one (transfusion when hemoglobin concentration & g/dl) for reducing mortality and severe clinical complications among patients having major cancer surgery. All adult patients with cancer having major abdominal surgery who required postoperative intensive care were included and randomly allocated to treatment with the liberal or the restrictive erythrocyte transfusion strategy. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of mortality and morbidity. A total of 198 patients were included as follows: 101 in the restrictive group and 97 in the liberal group. The primary composite endpoint occurred in 19.6% (95% CI, 12.9 to 28.6%) of patients in the liberal-strategy group and in 35.6% (27.0 to 45.4%) of patients in the restrictive-strategy group (P = 0.012). Compared with the restrictive strategy, the liberal transfusion strategy was associated with an absolute risk reduction for the composite outcome of 16% (3.8 to 28.2%) and a number needed to treat of 6.2 (3.5 to 26.5). A liberal erythrocyte transfusion strategy with a hemoglobin trigger of 9 g/dl was associated with fewer major postoperative complications in patients having major cancer surgery compared with a restrictive strategy.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 11-2022
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 08-2021
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 25-09-2020
DOI: 10.1002/BJS.12050
Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
Date: 2021
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.20.01933
Abstract: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19–free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19–free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19–free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19–free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9% adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score–matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6% aOR, 0.53 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19–free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 09-05-2018
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 11-2022
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 11-2021
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 22-09-2020
DOI: 10.1093/DOTE/DOAA101
Abstract: There are no internationally recognized criteria available to determine preparedness for hospital discharge after esophagectomy. This study aims to achieve international consensus using Delphi methodology. The expert panel consisted of 40 esophageal surgeons spanning 16 countries and 4 continents. During a 3-round, web-based Delphi process, experts voted for discharge criteria using 5-point Likert scales. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Consensus was reached if agreement was ≥75% in round 3. Consensus was achieved for the following basic criteria: nutritional requirements are met by oral intake of at least liquids with optional supplementary nutrition via jejunal feeding tube. The patient should have passed flatus and does not require oxygen during mobilization or at rest. Central venous catheters should be removed. Adequate analgesia at rest and during mobilization is achieved using both oral opioid and non-opioid analgesics. All vital signs should be normal unless abnormal preoperatively. Inflammatory parameters should be trending down and close to normal (leucocyte count ≤12G/l and C-reactive protein ≤80 mg/dl). This multinational Delphi survey represents the first expert-led process for consensus criteria to determine ‘fit-for-discharge’ status after esophagectomy. Results of this Delphi survey may be applied to clinical outcomes research as an objective measure of short-term recovery. Furthermore, standardized endpoints identified through this process may be used in clinical practice to guide decisions regarding patient discharge and may help to reduce the risk of premature discharge or prolonged admission.
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 30-08-2018
DOI: 10.1093/DOTE/DOY071
Abstract: Achalasia is a relatively rare primary motor esophageal disorder, characterized by absence of relaxations of the lower esophageal sphincter and of peristalsis along the esophageal body. As a result, patients typically present with dysphagia, regurgitation and occasionally chest pain, pulmonary complication and malnutrition. New diagnostic methodologies and therapeutic techniques have been recently added to the armamentarium for treating achalasia. With the aim to offer clinicians and patients an up-to-date framework for making informed decisions on the management of this disease, the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus Guidelines proposed and endorsed the Esophageal Achalasia Guidelines (I-GOAL). The guidelines were prepared according the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE-REX) tool, accredited for guideline production by NICE UK. A systematic literature search was performed and the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations were graded according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Given the relative rarity of this disease and the paucity of high-level evidence in the literature, this process was integrated with a three-step process of anonymous voting on each statement (DELPHI). Only statements with an approval rate >80% were accepted in the guidelines. Fifty-one experts from 11 countries and 3 representatives from patient support associations participated to the preparations of the guidelines. These guidelines deal specifically with the following achalasia issues: Diagnostic workup, Definition of the disease, Severity of presentation, Medical treatment, Botulinum Toxin injection, Pneumatic dilatation, POEM, Other endoscopic treatments, Laparoscopic myotomy, Definition of recurrence, Follow up and risk of cancer, Management of end stage achalasia, Treatment options for failure, Achalasia in children, Achalasia secondary to Chagas' disease.
Location: Brazil
No related grants have been discovered for Ulysses Ribeiro Junior.