Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
Más filtros












Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 15(11S): S347-S364, 2018 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30392604

RESUMEN

Vertebral compression fractures (VCFs) have various causes, including osteoporosis, neoplasms, and acute trauma. As painful VCFs may contribute to general physical deconditioning, management of painful VCFs has the potential for improving quality of life and preventing superimposed medical complications. Various imaging modalities can be used to evaluate a VCF to help determine the etiology and guide intervention. The first-line treatment of painful VCFs has been nonoperative or conservative management as most VCFs show gradual improvement in pain over 2 to 12 weeks, with variable return of function. There is evidence that vertebral augmentation (VA) is associated with better pain relief and improved functional outcomes compared to conservative therapy for osteoporotic VCFs. A multidisciplinary approach is necessary for the management of painful pathologic VCFs, with management strategies including medications to affect bone turnover, radiation therapy, and interventions such as VA and percutaneous thermal ablation to alleviate symptoms. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Fracturas por Compresión/diagnóstico por imagen , Fracturas por Compresión/terapia , Fracturas de la Columna Vertebral/diagnóstico por imagen , Fracturas de la Columna Vertebral/terapia , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Fracturas por Compresión/etiología , Humanos , Manejo del Dolor/métodos , Recuperación de la Función , Sociedades Médicas , Fracturas de la Columna Vertebral/etiología , Estados Unidos
2.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 13(4): 389-400, 2016 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26922595

RESUMEN

Appropriate imaging modalities for the follow-up of malignant or aggressive musculoskeletal tumors include radiography, MRI, CT, (18)F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose PET/CT, (99m)Tc bone scan, and ultrasound. Clinical scenarios reviewed include evaluation for metastatic disease to the lung in low- and high-risk patients, for osseous metastatic disease in asymptomatic and symptomatic patients, for local recurrence of osseous tumors with and without significant hardware present, and for local recurrence of soft tissue tumors. The timing for follow-up of pulmonary metastasis surveillance is also reviewed. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every three years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Cuidados Posteriores/normas , Diagnóstico por Imagen/normas , Oncología Médica/normas , Enfermedades Musculoesqueléticas/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias/diagnóstico por imagen , Radiología/normas , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Enfermedades Musculoesqueléticas/terapia , Neoplasias/terapia , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud/normas , Pronóstico , Sociedades Médicas/normas , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados Unidos
3.
J Palliat Med ; 18(7): 573-84, 2015 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25974663

RESUMEN

Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) is an oncologic emergency and if left untreated, permanent paralysis will ensue. The treatment of MESCC is governed by disease, patient, and treatment factors. Patient's preferences and goals of care are to be weighed into the treatment plan. Ideally, a patient with MESCC is evaluated by an interdisciplinary team promptly to determine the urgency of the clinical scenario. Treatment recommendations must take into consideration the risk-benefit profiles of surgical intervention and radiotherapy for the particular individual's circumstance, including neurologic status, performance status, extent of epidural disease, stability of the spine, extra-spinal disease status, and life expectancy. In patients with high spinal instability neoplastic score (SINS) or retropulsion of bone fragments in the spinal canal, surgical intervention should be strongly considered. The rate of development of motor deficits from spinal cord compression may be a prognostic factor for ultimate functional outcome, and should be taken into account when a treatment recommendation is made. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every three years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Compresión de la Médula Espinal/terapia , Neoplasias de la Columna Vertebral/secundario , Anciano , Diagnóstico por Imagen , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Recurrencia , Sociedades Médicas , Compresión de la Médula Espinal/etiología , Compresión de la Médula Espinal/patología , Neoplasias de la Columna Vertebral/complicaciones , Enfermo Terminal
4.
J Palliat Med ; 18(1): 11-7, 2015 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25317672

RESUMEN

Bone metastases are a common clinical problem, affecting many types of cancer patients. The presence of tumor in bone can cause significant morbidity including pain, neurological dysfunction, hypercalcemia, and pathological fracture leading to functional loss. The optimal treatment of a patient with bone metastases depends on many factors, including evaluation of the patient's goals of care, performance status, mechanical stability of the affected bone, life expectancy, and overall extent of disease. Treatment options may include radiotherapy, systemic therapies, surgical stabilization, medical pain management, and radiopharmaceuticals. Ideal management of bone metastases requires a coordinated multidisciplinary approach among diagnostic radiologists, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists, orthopedic surgeons, pain specialists, physiatrists, and palliative care specialists. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria(®) are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guidelines development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Óseas/radioterapia , Neoplasias Óseas/secundario , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Humanos , Dosis de Radiación , Radioterapia/normas , Sociedades Médicas , Estados Unidos
5.
J Palliat Med ; 17(8): 880-6, 2014 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24971478

RESUMEN

Pretreatment evaluation is performed to determine the number, location, and size of the brain metastases and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the recommended imaging technique, particularly in patients being considered for surgery or stereotactic radiosurgery. A contiguous thin-cut volumetric MRI with gadolinium with newer gadolinium-based agents can improve detection of small brain metastases. A systemic workup and medical evaluation are important, given that subsequent treatment for the brain metastases will also depend on the extent of the extracranial disease and on the age and performance status of the patient. Patients with hydrocephalus or impending brain herniation should be started on high doses of corticosteroids and evaluated for possible neurosurgical intervention. Patients with moderate symptoms should receive approximately 4-8 mg/d of dexamethasone in divided doses. The routine use of corticosteroids in patients without neurologic symptoms is not necessary. There is no proven benefit of anticonvulsants in patient without seizures. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Encefálicas/secundario , Irradiación Craneana , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Neoplasias Encefálicas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Encefálicas/patología , Neoplasias Encefálicas/radioterapia , Diagnóstico por Imagen , Relación Dosis-Respuesta en la Radiación , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Examen Neurológico/efectos de la radiación
6.
J Palliat Med ; 16(1): 9-19, 2013 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23167547

RESUMEN

Abstract The spine is a common site of involvement in patients with bone metastases. Apart from pain, hypercalcemia, and pathologic fracture, progressive tumor can result in neurologic deterioration caused by spinal cord compression or cauda equina involvement. The treatment of spinal bone metastases depends on histology, site of disease, extent of epidural disease, extent of metastases elsewhere, and neurologic status. Treatment recommendations must weigh the risk-benefit profile of external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for the particular individual's circumstance, including neurologic status, performance status, extent of spinal disease, stability of the spine, extra-spinal disease status, and life expectancy. Patients with spinal instability should be evaluated for surgical intervention. Research studies are needed that evaluate the combination or sequencing of localized therapies with systemic therapies including chemotherapy, hormonal therapy (HT), osteoclast inhibitors (OI), and radiopharmaceuticals. The roles of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in the management of spinal oligometastasis, radioresistant spinal metastasis, and previously irradiated but progressive spinal metastasis are emerging, but more research is needed to validate the findings from retrospective studies. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Cuidados Paliativos , Neoplasias de la Columna Vertebral/radioterapia , Neoplasias de la Columna Vertebral/secundario , Anciano , Terapia Combinada , Fraccionamiento de la Dosis de Radiación , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Radioterapia Conformacional , Compresión de la Médula Espinal/etiología , Compresión de la Médula Espinal/radioterapia , Neoplasias de la Columna Vertebral/complicaciones , Estados Unidos
7.
J Palliat Med ; 15(5): 521-6, 2012 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22536988

RESUMEN

Bone is one of the most common sites of metastatic spread of malignancy, with possible deleterious effects including pain, hypercalcemia, and pathologic fracture. External beam radiotherapy (EBRT) remains the mainstay for treatment of painful bone metastases. EBRT may be combined with other local therapies like surgery or with systemic treatments like chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, osteoclast inhibitors, or radiopharmaceuticals. EBRT is not commonly recommended for patients with asymptomatic bone metastases unless they are associated with a risk of pathologic fracture. For those who do receive EBRT, appropriate fractionation schemes include 30 Gy in 10 fractions, 24 Gy in 6 fractions, 20 Gy in 5 fractions, or a single 8 Gy fraction. Single fraction treatment maximizes convenience, while fractionated treatment courses are associated with a lower incidence of retreatment. The appropriate postoperative dose fractionation following surgical stabilization is uncertain. Reirradiation with EBRT may be safe and provide pain relief, though retreatment might create side effect risks which warrant its use as part of a clinical trial. All patients with bone metastases should be considered for concurrent management by a palliative care team, with patients whose life expectancy is less than six months appropriate for hospice evaluation. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every two years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Óseas/radioterapia , Neoplasias Óseas/secundario , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Guías como Asunto , Humanos , Dolor/radioterapia , Dosis de Radiación , Radioterapia/métodos , Sociedades Médicas
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...