Clinical and prognostic features of rectal neuroendocrine tumors.

BACKGROUND: Rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are among the most common NETs. The aim was to validate European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS)/North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (NANETS) staging and grading systems with regard to clinical outcomes. METHODS: A comprehensive database was constructed from existing databases of the Mount Sinai Division of Gastrointestinal Pathology and the Carcinoid Cancer Foundation. Analysis was performed on 141 patients identified with rectal NETs seen at Mount Sinai Hospital between 1972 and 2011. RESULTS: The median age was 52.7 years; 43% were males. Average tumor size was 0.88 cm. NETs <1 cm accounted for 75.6% of the tumors. Stage I, II, III and IV accounted for 79.4, 2.8, 5.0 and 12.8% of the tumors, respectively. G1 tumors accounted for 88.1%, G2 8.3% and G3 3.6%. Of G1 tumors, 94.6% were stage I and 5.4% were stage IV. The median survival time for all 141 patients was 6.8 years (range, 0.8-34.7 years). The overall 5-year survival rate was 84.4%. The 5-year survival rates for patients in stages I-IV were 92.7, 75.0, 42.9 and 33.2%, respectively. The 5-year survival rates for patients with G1-G3 tumors were 87.7, 47.6 and 33.3%, respectively. Univariate analysis of increased survival showed significance for lower stage, lower grade, smaller size, absence of symptoms and endoscopically treated tumors. Multivariate analysis showed that stage alone was statistically significant as the strongest predictor of survival. CONCLUSION: The results of our study validated ENETS/NANETS guidelines for staging and grading of rectal NETs in the US setting of a tertiary referral center. Staging according to ENETS/NANETS guidelines should be used in the treatment algorithm rather than size alone.

Patient Comfort with Yellow (577 nm) vs. Green (532 nm) Laser Panretinal Photocoagulation for Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy.

PURPOSE: Pain associated with panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) can adversely affect the number and quality of retinal burns delivered and subsequently increase the number of treatment sessions required to achieve regression of proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR). We assessed comfort in patients undergoing treatment with yellow (577 nm) vs. green (532 nm) PRP for PDR. DESIGN: Prospective, single-center, randomized crossover clinical trial. SUBJECTS: Patients with PDR with high-risk characteristics. METHODS: Subjects were equally randomized to first receive PRP with a laser indirect ophthalmoscope with either green (IQ 532; IRIDEX, Mountain View, CA) or yellow (IQ 577; IRIDEX) laser, followed by additional treatment with the opposite laser using standardized settings in the superior hemisphere of a single treatment eye per patient. Topical anesthetic was used in all study eyes before each treatment and power was titrated until moderate grey-white retinal burns were achieved. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was patient's perceived pain as measured with a standardized 10-point pain scale. Secondary outcome measures included laser power, treatment time, number of treatment shots with each laser, and physician ease-of-use score with each laser on a 10-point scale. RESULTS: Forty patients (40 eyes) with a mean age of 54.0 years were enrolled. Mean pain scores were similar when comparing treatment with yellow and green laser (3.1 ± 2.3 vs. 2.8 ± 2.6; P = 0.40). No significant difference was seen in visual acuity (P = 0.44) or central macular thickness (P = 0.39) 1 month after PRP. Additionally, there were no significant differences when comparing minimum power required (243.2 ± 74.2 vs. 234.0 ± 59.6 mW; P = 0.55), treatment time (5.1 ± 3.6 vs. 5.6 ± 3.9 minutes; P = 0.384), and number of treatment shots (257.6 ± 12.6 vs. 258.0 ± 2.3; P = 0.68). Six of 7 co-investigators (85%) preferred using yellow laser over green and reported ease-of-use scores of 9.0 ± 1.2 and 7.6 ± 1.4, respectively (P = 0.07). No severe adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Patient comfort during PRP for PDR utilizing laser indirect ophthalmoscopy is similar for green and yellow wavelengths.

Prognostic Value of Ocular Trauma Scores in Patients With Combined Open Globe Injuries and Facial Fractures.

PURPOSE: To assess the prognostic value of the Ocular Trauma Score in patients with combined open globe injuries and facial fractures. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: A comprehensive chart review was conducted on 25 patients (28 eyes) identified from the Elmhurst City Hospital Trauma Registry between January 1, 2000 and June 30, 2012. Elmhurst City Hospital is a level 1 trauma center located in Elmhurst, New York, USA. RESULTS: Average age was 52 (range 18-88) and patients were predominantly male (84%). The majority of patients had an Ocular Trauma Score of 1 (87.5%), and of these patients, 76% and 14% had final visual acuities of no light perception (NLP) and light perception/hand motion (LP/HM), respectively. These corresponded to 74% and 15% predicted by the original Ocular Trauma Score guidelines (100% sensitive and 100% specific). Ocular Trauma Score of 1 was associated with zone 3 eye wound location (P = .02). Independent of Ocular Trauma Score, initial visual acuity and frontal bone fractures were predictive of NLP (P = .006 and P = .047). Nonblindness was associated with nasal bone fractures (P = .047). CONCLUSION: This study validates the use of the Ocular Trauma Score in patients with combined facial fracture and open globe injury. The presence of facial fractures does not appear to influence visual prognosis for open globe injuries with an Ocular Trauma Score of 1. In the absence of data to calculate a full Ocular Trauma Score, initial visual acuity was the strongest predictor of final visual outcome.