RESUMEN
PURPOSE: The study aims to show how the "Puncture Cube" (PC) (Medical Templates, Egg, Switzerland) compares to the freehand method (FHM) for CT-guided punctures. METHODS: The PC is a patient-mounted disassemblable cube consisting of an upper and lower template with multiple holes each to predefine puncture trajectory. A total of 80 punctures (FHM in-plane, FHM off-plane, PC in-plane, PC off-plane) was performed by 4 radiologists on a target 9.1 cm below surface level of a neoprene covered elliptical cylinder gelatin phantom. The PC was never disassembled. Evaluated parameters were procedure time, number of CT-scans, euclidean distance (ED) and normal distance (ND). Respective parameters of FHM and PC were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Levene test with significance levels of 5%. RESULTS: PC achieved smaller ED and ND values after initial needle insertion without corrections for both in-plane and off-plane punctures (P > 0.05). Variance of initial NDs was off-plane significantly larger for FHM. Final ED after needle path corrections was smaller for FHM both in- and off-plane (P < 0.05). Final off-plane ND was significantly lower for FHM with no significant difference in final in-plane ND. FHM off-plane punctures were significantly faster. There was no significant difference in CT-scans between both methods. CONCLUSION: Utilizing the PC may improve initial needle positioning and safety especially off-plane. However, better final needle positioning after correction with the greater freedom of movement method may suggest need for disassembly of the cube.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Cancer is considered an emerging diabetes complication, with higher incidence and worse prognosis in patients with diabetes. Cancer is frequently associated with cachexia, a systemic metabolic disease causing wasting. It is currently unclear how diabetes affects the development and progression of cachexia. METHODS: We investigated the interplay between diabetes and cancer cachexia retrospectively in a cohort of 345 patients with colorectal and pancreatic cancer. We recorded body weight, fat mass, muscle mass, clinical serum values, and survival of these patients. Patients were grouped either into diabetic/non-diabetic groups based on previous diagnosis, or into obese/non-obese groups based on body mass index (BMI ≥30 kg/m2 was considered obese). RESULTS: The pre-existence of type 2 diabetes, but not obesity, in patients with cancer led to increased cachexia incidence (80%, compared to 61% without diabetes, p ≤ 0.05), higher weight loss (8.9% vs. 6.0%, p ≤ 0.001), and reduced survival probability (median survival days: 689 vs. 538, Chi square = 4.96, p ≤ 0.05) irrespective of the initial body weight or tumor progression. Patients with diabetes and cancer showed higher serum levels of C-reactive protein (0.919 µg/mL vs. 0.551 µg/mL, p ≤ 0.01) and interleukin 6 (5.98 pg/mL vs. 3.75 pg/mL, p ≤ 0.05) as well as lower serum albumin levels (3.98 g/dL vs. 4.18 g/dL, p ≤ 0.05) than patients with cancer without diabetes. In a sub-analysis of patients with pancreatic cancer, pre-existing diabetes worsened weight loss (9.95% vs. 6.93%, p ≤ 0.01), and increased the duration of hospitalization (24.41 days vs. 15.85 days, p ≤ 0.001). Further, diabetes aggravated clinical manifestations of cachexia, as changes in the aforementioned biomarkers were more pronounced in patients with diabetes and cachexia co-existence, compared to cachectic patients without diabetes (C-reactive protein: 2.300 µg/mL vs. 0.571 µg/mL, p ≤ 0.0001; hemoglobin: 11.24 g/dL vs. 12.52 g/dL, p ≤ 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We show for the first time that pre-existing diabetes aggravates cachexia development in patients with colorectal and pancreatic cancer. This is important when considering cachexia biomarkers and weight management in patients with co-existing diabetes and cancer.
