Purpose: The prevalence of BRAF, NRAS, and p16CDKN2A mutations during melanoma progression remains inconclusive. We investigated the prevalence and distribution of mutations in these genes in different melanoma tissues. Patients and Methods: In all, 291 tumor tissues from 132 patients with melanoma were screened. Paired samples of primary melanomas (n = 102) and synchronous or asynchronous metastases from the same patients (n = 165) were included. Tissue samples underwent mutation analysis (automated DNA sequencing). Secondary lesions included lymph nodes (n = 84), and skin (n = 36), visceral (n = 25), and brain (n = 44) sites. Results: BRAF/NRAS mutations were identified in 58% of primary melanomas (43% BRAF; 15% NRAS); 62% in lymph nodes, 61% subcutaneous, 56% visceral, and 70% in brain sites. Mutations were observed in 63% of metastases (48% BRAF; 15% NRAS), a nonsignificant increase in mutation frequency after progression from primary melanoma. Of the paired samples, lymph nodes (93% consistency) and visceral metastases (96% consistency) presented a highly similar distribution of BRAF/NRAS mutations versus primary melanomas, with a significantly less consistent pattern in brain (80%) and skin metastases (75%). This suggests that independent subclones are generated in some patients. p16CDKN2A mutations were identified in 7% and 14% of primary melanomas and metastases, with a low consistency (31%) between secondary and primary tumor samples. Conclusion: In the era of targeted therapies, assessment of the spectrum and distribution of alterations in molecular targets among patients with melanoma is needed. Our findings about the prevalence of BRAF/NRAS/p16CDKN2A mutations in paired tumor lesions from patients with melanoma may be useful in the management of this disease.

The risk of surgical site infection is always present in surgery; the use of prosthetic materials is linked to an increased possibility of infection. Breast augmentation and breast reconstruction with implants are gaining popularity in developing countries. Implant infection is the main complication related to breast aesthetic and reconstructive surgery. In the present paper, we reviewed the current microbiological knowledge about implant infections, with particular attention to risk factors, diagnosis, clinical management, and antibiotic prophylaxis, focusing on reports from developing countries. After breast aesthetic surgery, up to 2.9% of patients develop a surgical site infection, with an incidence of 1.7% for acute infections and 0.8% for late infections. The rate of surgical site infection after post-mastectomy breast reconstruction is usually higher, ranging from 1% to 53%. The clinical features are not constant, and bacterial culture with antibiogram is the gold standard for diagnosis and for identification of antibiotic resistance. While waiting for culture results, empiric therapy with vancomycin and extended-spectrum penicillins or cephalosporins is recommended. Some patients require removal of the infected prosthesis. The main methods to bring down the risk of infection are strict asepsis protocol, preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, and irrigation of the surgical pocket and implant with an antibiotic solution.