Suppression of angiogenesis during diabetes is a recognized phenomenon but is less appreciated within the context of diabetic retinopathy. The current study has investigated regulation of retinal angiogenesis by diabetic serum and determined if advanced glycation end products (AGEs) could modulate this response, possibly via AGE-receptor interactions. A novel in vitro model of retinal angiogenesis was developed and the ability of diabetic sera to regulate this process was quantified. AGE-modified serum albumin was prepared according to a range of protocols, and these were also analyzed along with neutralization of the AGE receptors galectin-3 and RAGE. Retinal ischemia and neovascularization were also studied in a murine model of oxygen-induced proliferative retinopathy (OIR) in wild-type and galectin-3 knockout mice (gal3 ؊/؊ ) after perfusion of preformed AGEs. Serum from nondiabetic patients showed significantly more angiogenic potential than diabetic serum (P < 0.0001) and within the diabetic group, poor glycemic control resulted in more AGEs but less angiogenic potential than tight control (P < 0.01). AGE-modified albumin caused a dose-dependent inhibition of angiogenesis (P < 0.001), and AGE receptor neutralization significantly reversed the AGE-mediated suppression of angiogenesis (P < 0.01). AGE-treated wild-type mice showed a significant increase in inner retinal ischemia and a reduction in neovascularization compared with non-AGE controls (P < 0.001). However, ablation of galectin-3 abolished the AGE-mediated increase in retinal ischemia and restored the neovascular response to that seen in controls. The data suggest a significant suppression of angiogenesis by the retinal microvasculature during diabetes and implicate AGEs and AGEreceptor interactions in its causation. Diabetes 53: 785-794, 2005

Background The B-MaP-C study aimed to determine alterations to breast cancer (BC) management during the peak transmission period of the UK COVID-19 pandemic and the potential impact of these treatment decisions. Methods This was a national cohort study of patients with early BC undergoing multidisciplinary team (MDT)-guided treatment recommendations during the pandemic, designated ‘standard’ or ‘COVID-altered’, in the preoperative, operative and post-operative setting. Findings Of 3776 patients (from 64 UK units) in the study, 2246 (59%) had ‘COVID-altered’ management. ‘Bridging’ endocrine therapy was used (n = 951) where theatre capacity was reduced. There was increasing access to COVID-19 low-risk theatres during the study period (59%). In line with national guidance, immediate breast reconstruction was avoided (n = 299). Where adjuvant chemotherapy was omitted (n = 81), the median benefit was only 3% (IQR 2–9%) using ‘NHS Predict’. There was the rapid adoption of new evidence-based hypofractionated radiotherapy (n = 781, from 46 units). Only 14 patients (1%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during their treatment journey. Conclusions The majority of ‘COVID-altered’ management decisions were largely in line with pre-COVID evidence-based guidelines, implying that breast cancer survival outcomes are unlikely to be negatively impacted by the pandemic. However, in this study, the potential impact of delays to BC presentation or diagnosis remains unknown.

BackgroundInternationally, supporting surgical trainees during pregnancy, maternity and paternity leave is essential for trainee well-being and for retention of high-calibre surgeons, regardless of their parental status. This study sought to determine the current experience of surgical trainees regarding pregnancy, maternity and paternity leave.MethodsA cross-sectional anonymised electronic voluntary survey of all surgical trainees working in the UK and Ireland was distributed via the Association of Surgeons in Training and the British Orthopaedic Trainees’ Association.ResultsThere were 876 complete responses, of whom 61.4% (n=555) were female. 46.5% (258/555) had been pregnant during surgical training. The majority (51.9%, n=134/258) stopped night on-call shifts by 30 weeks’ gestation. The most common reason for this was concerns related to tiredness and maternal health. 41% did not have rest facilities available on night shifts. 27.1% (n=70/258) of trainees did not feel supported by their department during pregnancy, and 17.1% (n=50/258) found the process of arranging maternity leave difficult or very difficult. 61% (n=118/193) of trainees felt they had returned to their normal level of working within 6 months of returning to work after maternity leave, while a significant minority took longer. 25% (n=33/135) of trainees found arranging paternity leave difficult or very difficult, and the most common source of information regarding paternity leave was other trainees.ConclusionOver a quarter of surgical trainees felt unsupported by their department during pregnancy, while a quarter of male trainees experience difficulty in arranging paternity leave. Efforts must be made to ensure support is available in pregnancy and maternity/paternity leave.

Background Do plastic surgeons really know what happens to the breast after surgery? We often think that we do, but we have very few measurements to show whether we are on the right track. Objectives Only when the surgeon can predict the changes can she or he achieve consistent outcomes. Measurements lead to understanding; understanding what the measurements show allows us to refine our approach. Methods Consecutive patients in 4 categories were analyzed: breast reduction, mastopexy, augmentation, and mastopexy-augmentation. All procedures were performed by a single surgeon and all measurements were performed by the same surgeon. A standard measuring tape was utilized, and data were collected immediately preoperatively and at each follow-up visit. Only those patients with preoperative and complete 1-year postoperative measurements were included in this review. The parameters measured were clavicle to upper breast border (UBB), UBB to nipple, suprasternal notch (SSN) to nipple, SSN to inframammary fold (IMF), and chest midline to nipple. Results The changes were consistent. The borders of the breast footprint were expanded with the addition of an implant (UBB and IMF) and reduced with the removal of parenchyma (IMF). The existing SSN to nipple position was stretched when volume was added to the breast mound and it remained unchanged from the preoperatively marked position in a breast reduction. Conclusions Although measurements are not necessary to achieve good aesthetic results in breast surgery, surgeons should understand what the measurements show and what happens to the different breast parameters. Level of Evidence: 3

No abstract