RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Colonic stent placement in patients with large-bowel obstruction (LBO) secondary to extracolonic malignancy (ECM) has been evaluated in small series with heterogeneous results. Our aim is to better characterize the technical and clinical success of colonic stent placement and to identify factors that affect this success in ECM patients. METHODS: All patients at a single high-volume center who presented for colonic stent placement for LBO because of ECM between 2001 and 2012 were retrospectively identified. The outcomes of interest were technical success, clinical success, stent occlusion rate, and overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 187 patients were identified. Mean age was 61.9 years (range, 23-89), and 150 (80.2%) were women. The most common malignancy type was urogynecologic (n = 104) and most common location sigmoid colon (n = 128). Overall, 142 patients (75.9%) achieved technical success and 102 patients (54.5%) clinical success. Radiographic presence of peritoneal carcinomatosis (P < .001) and multifocal disease (P < .001) were associated with both decreased technical and clinical success. Procedure-related adverse events were seen in 12 patients (6.4%). In patients with clinical success, the incidence of stent occlusion at 3 months was 14.7% (95% confidence interval, 7.8%-21.6%) and was higher in patients with prior radiation therapy (P = .011). The median overall survival for all patients from time of attempted stent placement was 3.3 months (95% confidence interval, 3.0-4.1). CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the largest retrospective series of colonic stent placement for LBO in ECM patients in the literature. Our technical success rate of 75.9%, clinical success rate of 54.5%, and 3-month stent occlusion rate of 14.7% suggest that stent placement is a viable palliative option for patients with advanced disease because of ECM. Patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis and multifocal disease have reduced technical and clinical success. However, these factors should not dissuade an attempt at stent placement, if risk-to-benefit analysis is favorable.
Assuntos
Carcinoma/complicações , Neoplasias do Sistema Digestório/complicações , Neoplasias dos Genitais Femininos/complicações , Obstrução Intestinal/cirurgia , Doenças do Colo Sigmoide/cirurgia , Stents , Neoplasias Urológicas/complicações , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Doenças do Colo/etiologia , Doenças do Colo/cirurgia , Colonoscopia , Feminino , Humanos , Obstrução Intestinal/etiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neoplasias Primárias Múltiplas/epidemiologia , Neoplasias Peritoneais/epidemiologia , Prognóstico , Radioterapia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Doenças do Colo Sigmoide/etiologia , Sigmoidoscopia , Adulto JovemRESUMO
PURPOSE: To compare treatment plans and evaluate dosimetric characteristics of permanent cesium-131 (131Cs) vs. iodine-125 (125I) implants used in brain brachytherapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-four patients with 131Cs implants from a prospective phase I/II trial were re-planned with 125I implants. In order to evaluate the volume of brain tissue exposed to radiation therapy (RT), the dose volume histogram was generated for both radioisotopes. To evaluate the dosimetric differences of the two radioisotopes we compared homogeneity (HI) and conformity indices (CI), and dose covering 100% (D100), 90% (D90), 80% (D80), and 50% (D50) of the clinical target volume (CTV). RESULTS: At the 100%, 90%, 80%, and 50% isodose lines, the 131Cs plans exposed less mean volume of brain tissue than the 125I plans (p < 0.001). The D100, D90, D80, and D50 were smaller for 131Cs (p < 0.001). The HI and CI for 131Cs vs. 125I were 19.71 vs. 29.04 and 1.31 vs. 1.92, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to 125I, 131Cs exposed smaller volumes of brain tissue to equivalent doses of radiation and delivered lower radiation doses to equivalent volumes of the CTV. 131Cs exhibited a higher HI, indicating increased uniformity of doses within the CTV. Lastly, 131Cs presented a CI closer to 1, indicating that the total volume receiving the prescription dose was closer to the desired CTV volume. These results suggest that 131Cs is dosimetrically superior to 125I and may explain the reason for the 0% incidence of radiation necrosis (RN) in our previously published prospective study using 131Cs.
RESUMO
BACKGROUNDS AND AIMS: As treatment for esophageal cancer often involves a multidisciplinary approach, the initial endoscopic report is essential for communication between providers. Several guidelines have been established to standardize endoscopic reporting. This study evaluates the compliance of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) reporting with the current national guidelines. METHODS: Combining the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and Society of Thoracic Surgeons guidelines, 11 quality indicators (QIs) for EGD and 8 for EUS were identified. We evaluated initial EGD and EUS reports from our institution (Memorial Sloan Kettering [MSK]) and outside hospitals (OSHs) and calculated individual and overall quality measure scores. Scores between locations were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and McNemar's test for paired data. RESULTS: In total, 115 initial EGD reports and 105 EUS reports were reviewed for patients who underwent surgery for esophageal cancer between 2014 and 2016. The median number of QIs reported for the initial EGD was 4 (IQR, 3-6)-only 34% of reports qualified as "good quality" (those with ≥ 6 QIs). None of the reports included all QIs. For patients who underwent EGD at both MSK and an OSH, 32% of reports from OSHs were good quality, compared with 68% from MSK (p < 0.001). Compliance with QIs was better for EUS reports: 71% of OSH reports and 72% of MSK reports were good quality. CONCLUSIONS: Detailed information on the initial endoscopic assessment is essential in today's age of multidisciplinary care. Identification and adoption of QIs for endoscopic reporting is warranted to ensure the provision of appropriate treatment.
Assuntos
Documentação/normas , Endoscopia Gastrointestinal , Endossonografia , Neoplasias Esofágicas/diagnóstico por imagem , Fidelidade a Diretrizes/estatística & dados numéricos , Prontuários Médicos/normas , Idoso , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirurgia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Indicadores de Qualidade em Assistência à SaúdeRESUMO
Glioblastoma is not only the most common primary brain tumor, but also the most aggressive. Currently, the most effective treatment of surgery, chemotherapy and radiation therapy allows for a modest median survival of 15 months. Here, we report a case of a 57-year-old male with histologically confirmed glioblastoma with unfavorable prognostic characteristics (poor performance status and persistent neurological symptoms after surgery), whose expected 5-year survival is 0%. Further genetic analysis offered a mixed prognostic picture with positive methylation of 0-6-methylguinine-DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) methyltransferase (MGMT; favorable prognosis) and wild-type isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH-1; unfavorable prognosis). Remarkably, the patient showed a progression-free survival of 5.5 years and a total survival of 6.5 years. In the context of recently published literature, the authors hypothesize that the patient's use of the antipsychotic medication risperidone may have had a potential antitumor effect. Risperidone antagonizes the dopamine-2 receptor and the serotonin-7 receptor, both of which have been individually implicated in the growth and progression of glioblastoma. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first clinical case in the literature to explore this association.