No abstract

No abstract

With the discovery of the BRCA1 gene and other genetic mutations associated with breast cancer, it has been established that hereditary mutations account for up to 5% of patients presenting with breast cancer.We performed a systematic review of English Language Literature to determine the role of BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations in African breast cancer patients. PUBMED and AJOL database were searched for publications addressing Breast Cancer and BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. PUBMED was searched using the following words in various combinations; ‘Breast Cancer’, ‘BRCA1’, ‘BRCA2’, ‘BRCA’, ‘Genes’, ‘Cancer Genes’, and ‘Africa’.16 studies fulfilled the study criteria up till December 2011. The studies were from North Africa (NA) and Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).A total of 9 studies were found evaluating 752 (352 repeated Zhang J (2010)) patients from SSA. Three studies (144 patients) evaluated all the coding regions of both BRCA1 and BRCA2 while 2 studies (571 patients) evaluated part(s) of BRCA1 and one (20 Patients) evaluated part(s) of BRCA2, one re-evaluated the whole of the BRCA1 gene in a previous sub-set of patients, while one (16 patients) evaluated parts of both BRCA1 and BRCA2.In North Africa, 6 studies evaluated 374 patients, with 4 studies (219 patients) evaluating the whole of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes while two (155 patients) studies evaluated only parts of both BRCA1 and BRCA2, with one of the studies evaluating the whole of the BRCA1 gene in a subset (24 patients).Due to this paucity of well powered population based studies evaluating the influence of BRCA genetic mutations in breast cancer patients in Africa, there is a need to perform well powered studies and population screening to determine the impact of germ line mutations in the Breast Cancer patient in Africa before any categorical statements can be made with respect to their BRCA status.

No abstract

Background:Abdominal trauma constitutes a significant cause of potentially preventable mortality. Therefore, knowledge of the determinants of outcome facilitates the development of rational treatment protocols for improving outcome.Objective:To identify the determinants of outcome in patients with abdominal trauma managed in a tertiary health center.Patients and Methods:This is a prospective study of consecutive patients presenting with abdominal trauma to our tertiary health center over a 12-month period. Data regarding patient demographics, injury mechanisms, type of organ injuries, treatment modalities, injury-to-intervention time, and outcomes were documented. The Injury Severity Scores and Revised Trauma Scores were determined. The data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 20.Results:There were 76 patients, 66 males and 10 females, whose ages ranged from 15 to 66 years (mean of 32.9 ± 10 years). Thirty-one (40.2%) patients had blunt abdominal trauma whereas 45 (59.8%) patients had penetrating trauma. There was a mortality rate of 8% predominantly from blunt trauma as compared to penetrating abdominal trauma (12.9% vs. 4.4%). There was a statistically significant difference between survivors and nonsurvivors as regards the means of injury-to-intervention time (25.4 ± 36.4 vs. 67.5 ± 58.2, P = 0.007), the means of Injury Severity Scores (15.1 ± 27.9 vs. 23.7 ± 9.8, P = 0.008), and the presence of brain injury (50.0% vs. 5.6%, P = 0.029).Conclusion:This study has shown that delayed intervention, high Injury Severity Score, and associated significant brain injury were determinants of poor outcomes. Prompt intervention and postoperative management in intensive care definitely improve outcome.