Pain and symptom relief using inhaled methoxyflurane for gynecologic brachytherapy applicator removal.

Purpose: Intra-cavitary brachytherapy forms an essential part of the curative treatment of cervical and vaginal cancer, and can be used for cure or palliation in endometrial and vulval cancers. Removal of brachytherapy applicators is often performed after anaesthesia has worn off and can be an uncomfortable and anxiety-provoking procedure. In this paper, we present our experience in a series of patients before and after the introduction of inhaled methoxyflurane (IMF, Penthrox™). Material and methods: Questionnaires were sent to patients prior to the introduction of IMF to retrospectively score pain and anxiety during the brachytherapy procedure. Following successful review by the local drugs and therapeutic committee as well as staff training, IMF was introduced and offered to patients during applicator removal. Prospective pain scores and retrospective questionnaires were collected. Pain was rated on a scale of 0 to 10, with zero being no pain and 10 being extreme pain. Results: Thirteen patients returned retrospective questionnaires prior to IMF introduction and seven patients following IMF introduction. After the first brachytherapy insertion, the mean recollected pain score during applicator removal decreased from 6/10 to 1/10 (p = 0.002). The mean recollected pain score one hour after applicator removal reduced from 3/10 to 0 (p = 0.04). Prospective measurements for 77 insertions in 44 patients receiving IMF reported a median pain score of 1/10 immediately before applicator removal (range, 0-10), and 0/10 immediately after applicator removal (range, 0-5). Conclusions: Inhaled methoxyflurane is easily administered and effective method of decreasing pain during applicator removal following gynecologic brachytherapy.

GEC ESTRO ACROP consensus recommendations for contact brachytherapy for rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: To issue consensus recommendations for contact X-Ray brachytherapy (CXB) for rectal cancer covering pre-treatment evaluation, treatment, dosimetric issues and follow-up. These recommendations cover CXB in the definitive and palliative setting. METHODS: Members of GEC ESTRO with expertise in rectal CXB issued consensus-based recommendations for CXB based on literature review and clinical experience. Levels of evidence according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence based medicine guidance are presented where possible. RESULTS: The GEC ESTRO ACROP consensus recommendations support the use of CXB to increase the chances of clinical complete remission and cure for patients who are elderly with high surgical risk, surgically unfit or refusing surgery. For palliative treatment, the use of CXB is recommended for symptomatic relief and disease control. The use of CXB in an organ-preservation setting in surgically fit patients is recommended within the setting of a clinical trial or registry. CONCLUSIONS: The GEC ESTRO ACROP recommendations for CXB are provided. Recommendations towards standardisation of reporting and prescription are given. Practitioners are encouraged to follow these recommendations and to develop further clinical trials to examine this treatment modality and increase the evidence base for its use. The routine collection of outcomes both clinical and patient-reported is also encouraged.