FAUZE MALUF FILHO

(Fonte: Lattes)
Índice h a partir de 2011
16
Lattes
ResearcherID
ORCID
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Instituto Central, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina - Médico
Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina - Médico
LIM/37 - Laboratório de Transplante e Cirurgia de Fígado, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina

Filtros

Mostrar mais
Limpar filtros

Configurações

search.filters.applied.f.dateIssued: 2024 ×

Resultados de Busca

Agora exibindo 1 - 3 de 3
  • article 0 Citação(ões) na Scopus
    Comparing three-dimensional endorectal ultrasound and magnification chromoendoscopy for early rectal neoplasia invasion depth assessment
    (2024) PINTO, Rodrigo Ambar; KAWAGUTI, Fabio Shiguehissa; KIMURA, Cintia Mayumi Sakurai; CORREA NETO, Isaac Jose Felippe; NAHAS, Caio Sergio Rizkallah; MARQUES, Carlos Frederico Sparapan; BUSTAMANTE-LOPEZ, Leonardo Alfonso; RIBEIRO-JR, Ulysses; MALUF-FILHO, Fauze; NAHAS, Sergio Carlos
    IntroductionAccurate assessment of invasion depth of early rectal neoplasms is essential for optimal therapy. We aimed to compare three-dimensional endorectal ultrasound (3D-ERUS) with magnification chromoendoscopy (MCE) regarding their accuracy in assessing parietal invasion depth (T).MethodsPatients with middle and distal rectum neoplasms were prospectively included. Two providers blinded to each other's assessment performed 3D-ERUS and MCE, respectively. The T stage assessed through ERUS was compared to the MCE evaluation. The results were compared to the surgical specimen anatomopathological report. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive (PPV), and negative (NPV) predictive values were calculated for the T stage and for the final therapy (local excision or radical surgery).ResultsIn 8 years, 70 patients were enrolled, and all underwent both exams. MCE and ERUS showed an accuracy of 94.3% and 85.7%, sensitivity of 83.7 and 93.3%, specificity of 96.4 and 83.6%, PPV of 86.7 and 60.9%, and NPV of 96.4 and 97.9%, respectively. Kappa for T stage assessed through ERUS was 0.64 and 0.83 for MCE.ConclusionMCE and 3D-ERUS had good diagnostic performance, but the endoscopic method had higher accuracy. Both methods reliably assessed lesion extension, circumferential involvement, and distance from the anal verge.
  • article 0 Citação(ões) na Scopus
  • article 8 Citação(ões) na Scopus
    Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastroenterostomy versus uncovered duodenal metal stenting for unresectable malignant gastric outlet obstruction (DRA-GOO): a multicentre randomised controlled trial
    (2024) TEOH, Anthony Yuen Bun; LAKHTAKIA, Sundeep; TARANTINO, Ilaria; PEREZ-MIRANDA, Manuel; KUNDA, Rastislav; MALUF-FILHO, Fauze; DHIR, Vinay; BASHA, Jahangeer; CHAN, Shannon Melissa; LIGRESTI, Dario; MA, Mark Tsz Wah; SERNA-HIGUERA, Carlos de la; YIP, Hon Chi; NG, Enders Kwok Wai; CHIU, Philip Wai Yan; ITOI, Takao
    Background Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is a novel endoscopic method to palliate malignant gastric outlet obstruction. We aimed to assess whether the use of EUS-GE with a double balloon occluder for malignant gastric outlet obstruction could reduce the need for reintervention within 6 months compared with conventional duodenal stenting. Methods The was an international, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial conducted at seven sites in Hong Kong, Belgium, Brazil, India, Italy, and Spain. Consecutive patients (aged >= 18 years) with malignant gastric outlet obstruction due to unresectable primary gastroduodenal or pancreatobiliary malignancies, a gastric outlet obstruction score (GOOS) of 0 (indicating an inability in intake food or liquids orally), and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 3 or lower were included and randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either EUS-GE or duodenal stenting. The primary outcome was the 6-month reintervention rate, defined as the percentage of patients requiring additional endoscopic intervention due to stent dysfunction (ie, restenosis of the stent due to tumour ingrowth, tumour overgrowth, or food residue; stent migration; or stent fracture) within 6 months, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Prespecified secondary outcomes were technical success (successful placement of a stent), clinical success (1-point improvement in gastric outlet obstruction score [GOOS] within 3 days), adverse events within 30 days, death within 30 days, duration of stent patency, GOOS at 1 month, and quality-of-life scores. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03823690) and is completed. Findings Between Dec 1, 2020, and Feb 28, 2022, 185 patients were screened and 97 (46 men and 51 women) were recruited and randomly allocated (48 to the EUS-GE group and 49 to the duodenal stent group). Mean age was 695 years (SD 126) in the EUS-GE group and 648 years (130) in the duodenal stent group. All randomly allocated patients completed follow-up and were analysed. Reintervention within 6 months was required in two (4%) patients in the EUS-GE group and 14 (29%) in the duodenal stent group [p=00020; risk ratio 015 [95% CI 004-061]). Stent patency was longer in the EUS-GE group (median not reached in either group; HR 013 [95% CI 008-022], log-rank p<00001). 1-month GOOS was significantly better in the EUS-GE group (mean 241 [SD 07]) than the duodenal stent group (191 [09], p=0012). There were no statistically significant differences between the EUS-GE and duodenal stent groups in death within 30 days (ten [21%] vs six [12%] patients, respectively, p=0286), technical success, clinical success, or quality-of-life scores at 1 month. Adverse events occurred 11 (23%) patients in the EUS-GE group and 12 (24%) in the duodenal stent group within 30 days (p=100); three cases of pneumonia (two in the EUS-GE group and one in the duodenal stent group) were considered to be procedure related Interpretation In patients with malignant gastric outlet obstruction, EUS-GE can reduce the frequency of reintervention, improve stent patency, and result in better patient-reported eating habits compared with duodenal stenting, and the procedure should be used preferentially over duodenal stenting when expertise and required devices are available.