Predicting patients at risk for pain associated with electrochemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Electrochemotherapy describes the use of electric pulses to enhance chemotherapy uptake, and has proven highly efficient in treating cutaneous metastases. Patients referred for electrochemotherapy present with diverse clinical pictures, from multiple small lesions to large, ulcerated lesions. Post-electrochemotherapy pain has been observed in some patients. The objectives of this study were to evaluate pain scores before and after electrochemotherapy, and to investigate if patients at risk of post-procedure pain could be identified. METHODS: Seven cancer centres in the International Network for Sharing Practices on Electrochemotherapy (INSPECT) consecutively and prospectively reported to a common database. Electrochemotherapy consisted of intratumoural or intravenous injection of bleomycin, followed by delivery of electric pulses in local or general anesthesia. RESULTS: Of 121 patients 39% had metastatic melanoma, 18% squamous cell carcinoma, 16% breast cancer, 13% basal-cell carcinoma, and 14% other malignancies. Median size of the largest nodules was 2.3 cm (range 0.3-40 cm). A majority of patients presented with low pain scores, and this continued through follow-up (74%). A subset of patients had moderate (13%) or severe pain (13%) after treatment. Post-procedure pain was statistically significantly associated with: 1) moderate or severe pain before treatment (p<0.0001); 2) size of the largest treated lesion (p<0.01); 3) previous irradiation (p<0.02); and 4) high treatment current value (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: The majority of patients had no or mild pain after electrochemotherapy. Patients at risk for post-procedure pain could be identified at the pre-treatment visit, and/or at the time of treatment, enabling a pain management strategy for this group.

VAC® for external fixation of flail chest.

A large aterior chest wall defect following tumor resection was reconstructed with a Gore-Tex® membrane and a combined musculocutaneous rectus femoris and tensor fasciae latae free flap. Subsequent paradoxical respiration impeded weaning from the ventilator. Appliance of Vacuum Assisted Closure® (VAC®) resulted in immediate chest wall stability and a decrease in the patient's need for respiratory support. Shortly thereafter, the VAC® was discontinued and the patient was discharged from the intensive care unit (ICU). This case report is the first to describe the successful use of VAC® as an adjuvant to a one-stage procedure for large thoracic wall reconstruction, allowing sufficient temporary external fixation to eliminate paradoxical respiration and plausibly shorten the stay in the ICU. No adverse effects on flap healing or haemodynamics were recorded. It is likely that external VAC® can improve thoracic stability and pulmonary function in a patient with flail chest and decrease the need for mechanical ventilation.

Effect of perioperative beta blockade in patients with diabetes undergoing major non-cardiac surgery: randomised placebo controlled, blinded multicentre trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the long term effects of perioperative beta blockade on mortality and cardiac morbidity in patients with diabetes undergoing major non-cardiac surgery. DESIGN: Randomised placebo controlled and blinded multicentre trial. Analyses were by intention to treat. SETTING: University anaesthesia and surgical centres and one coordinating centre. PARTICIPANTS: 921 patients aged > 39 scheduled for major non-cardiac surgery. INTERVENTIONS: 100 mg metoprolol controlled and extended release or placebo administered from the day before surgery to a maximum of eight perioperative days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The composite primary outcome measure was time to all cause mortality, acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina, or congestive heart failure. Secondary outcome measures were time to all cause mortality, cardiac mortality, and non-fatal cardiac morbidity. RESULTS: Mean duration of intervention was 4.6 days in the metoprolol group and 4.9 days in the placebo group. Metoprolol significantly reduced the mean heart rate by 11% (95% confidence interval 9% to 13%) and mean blood pressure by 3% (1% to 5%). The primary outcome occurred in 99 of 462 patients in the metoprolol group (21%) and 93 of 459 patients in the placebo group (20%) (hazard ratio 1.06, 0.80 to 1.41) during a median follow-up of 18 months (range 6-30). All cause mortality was 16% (74/462) in the metoprolol group and 16% (72/459) in the placebo group (1.03, 0.74 to 1.42). The difference in risk for the proportion of patients with serious adverse events was 2.4% (- 0.8% to 5.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative metoprolol did not significantly affect mortality and cardiac morbidity in these patients with diabetes. Confidence intervals, however, were wide, and the issue needs reassessment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN58485613.