[Vasculitis assessment with [18F]FDG positron emission tomography]. / Place de la tomographie par émission de positrons (TEP) au [18F]FDG dans l'exploration et la surveillance des vascularites.

[18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (PET) is a noninvasive metabolic imaging modality that is well-suited to the assessment of activity and extent of large vessel vasculitis. PET imaging has demonstrated its usefulness in diagnosing giant cell arteritis (notably in its silent form), Takayasu's arteritis, and unclassified aortitis. PET imaging could be more effective than magnetic resonance imaging in detecting the earliest stages of vascular wall inflammation. The visual grading of vascular [18F]FDG uptake makes it possible to discriminate arteritis from active atherosclerosis, providing therefore high specificity. High sensitivity can also be achieved provided scanning is performed during active inflammatory phase, preferably before starting corticosteroid treatment. Prospective studies are needed to determine the exact value of PET imaging in assessing other vasculitis subsets, infectious aortitis, and large vessel vasculitis outcome and response to immunosuppressive treatment.

Evaluation of at-home phlebotomy for iron overload: feasibility and satisfaction of patients and healthcare workers.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate at-home phlebotomy and the satisfaction of iron-overload patients and healthcare workers with the procedure. METHODS: Forty-two patients underwent at-home phlebotomy between 2003 and 2006. The phlebotomy was performed by the patient's nurse, who was trained by the private healthcare firm that also took charge of the disposal of the blood products. Data concerning these phlebotomies were collected via telephone interviews with all 42 patients, as well as 35 nurses and 40 primary-care physicians. The Limousin Regional Health Observatory processed the data collection. RESULTS: Ninety percent (38/42) of the patients, 80% (28/35) of the nurses and 67% (27/40) of the primary-care physicians responded. For 80% of the patients, phlebotomy volume and frequency were as prescribed. Patients chose home phlebotomy for personal reasons, or because of the limited availability of French Blood Establishment facilities (68%), or in response to being offered it by their hospital physician (32%). For 81.6% of the patients, at-home phlebotomy was more satisfactory than phlebotomy in hospital or at the French Blood Establishment and, for 84%, the constraints required were fully acceptable. The nurses considered that these homecare procedures were within their area of responsibility (100%), but felt that the remuneration was insufficient (65%). Ninety-six percent of the primary-care physicians said they were correctly informed, but only 40% felt that they were truly committed to the procedure. CONCLUSION: At-home phlebotomy is feasible, less costly than institutional phlebotomy and improves patient comfort.