Citations

Abstract Pretreatment evaluation is performed to determine the number, location, and size of the brain metastases and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the recommended imaging technique, particularly in patients being considered for surgery or stereotactic radiosurgery. A contiguous thin-cut volumetric MRI with gadolinium with newer gadolinium-based agents can improve detection of small brain metastases. A systemic workup and medical evaluation are important, given that subsequent treatment for the brain metastases will also depend on the extent of the extracranial disease and on the age and performance status of the patient. Patients with hydrocephalus or impending brain herniation should be started on high doses of corticosteroids and evaluated for possible neurosurgical intervention. Patients with moderate symptoms should receive approximately 4–8 mg/d of dexamethasone in divided doses. The routine use of corticosteroids in patients without neurologic symptoms is not necessary. There is no proven benefit of anticonvulsants in patient without seizures. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

Background Atrial fibrillation ( AF ) is a common sequela of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy ( HCM ), but evidence on its prevalence, risk factors, and effect on mortality is sparse. We sought to evaluate the prevalence of AF , identify clinical and echocardiographic correlates, and assess its effect on mortality in a large high‐risk HCM population. Methods and Results We identified HCM patients who underwent evaluation at our institution from 1975 to 2012. AF was defined by known history (either chronic or paroxysmal), electrocardiogram, or Holter monitoring at index visit. We examined clinical and echocardiographic variables in association with AF . The effect of AF on overall and cause‐specific mortality was evaluated with multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. Of 3673 patients with HCM , 650 (18%) had AF. Patients with AF were older and more symptomatic ( P <0.001). AF was less common among patients with obstructive HCM phenotype and was associated with larger left atria, higher E/e’ ratios, and worse cardiopulmonary exercise tolerance (all P values<0.001). During median (interquartile range) follow‐up of 4.1 (0.2 to 10) years, 1069 (29%) patients died. Patients with AF had worse survival compared to those without AF ( P <0.001). In multivariate analysis adjusted for established risk factors of mortality in HCM , the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for the effect of AF on overall mortality was 1.48 (1.27 to 1.71). AF did not have an effect on sudden or nonsudden cardiac death. Conclusions In this large referral HCM population, approximately 1 in 5 patients had AF . AF was a strong predictor of mortality, even after adjustment for established risk factors.

Background Eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) is presumed to be an isolated oesophageal disease; yet other allergic diseases associated with eosinophilic infiltration of target tissues, such as asthma and eczema, show perturbed functions of other sites that may be involved in the diathesis of allergy modulation. Aim To analyse small intestinal permeability in patients with active EoE and in a separate group of patients in remission. Methods Small bowel permeability was determined using a dual sugar method by calculating lactulose:mannitol (L:M) ratio in 17 patients who met consensus criteria for active EoE (>15 eos/HPF) and 8 patients in remission (<5 eos/HPF). Data from 28 healthy controls was used for comparison. Results Patients with active EoE had significantly higher L:M ratios when compared to controls (0.045 vs. 0.033, p<0.001) and to EoE in remission (0.041 vs. 0.027, p<.001). There was no significant difference in L:M between the group with EoEin remission and healthy controls. The current data show that L:M ratio of 0.033 also provides a reasonable cut-off that defined the active EoE group compared to patients in remission. The main component explaining the change in L:M ratio was increased absorption (and excretion) of lactulose ((1601±106 ug) when compared to the EoE remission (969±91 ug) and control (1043±92 ug, p<.001) groups. Conclusions Small bowel permeability is overall increased in patients with active EoE, and is normal in patients with EoE in remission when compared to healthy controls. The role of the small bowel in active EoE deserves further investigation.

SAGE-Journals-Accessible-Video-Player 10.1089/vid.2014.0017.M1 sj-vid-1-vid-10.1089_vid.2014.0017

ABSTRACTThe 6th Guidelines on the use of therapeutic apheresis in clinical practice published by the American Society of Apheresis provide practical, concise, and evidence based guidance for the apheresis medicine practitioner. The overall format of the Guidelines has remained unchanged with the 6th edition, compared to the 5th edition, with enhancements in the committee process of creating the guidelines. Because of changes in the writing committee structure, a number of changes have occurred in the ASFA category and recommendation grade for the use of apheresis in the treatment for a number of previously categorized clinical indications. In addition, eight new indications for apheresis, twenty three new clinical situations for previously categorized diseases, and ten new apheresis treatments for previously categorized disorders have been added. The 6th Guidelines continue to be an invaluable resource for those involved in apheresis medicine. J. Clin. Apheresis 29:191–193, 2014. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The aim of this study was to identify the physiotherapeutic management of patients with fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) in Northern Ireland. A postal questionnaire was distributed to physiotherapists working in outpatient settings in this region (n = 106). A response rate of 71% (n = 75) was achieved. Patients with FMS featured in the caseloads of all respondents. The most important reported goal of treatment was to ‘increase daily function’ (n = 24; 32%). Exercise (n = 44; 58.7%) and hydrotherapy (n = 12; 16.0%) were the most common treatment approaches. A total of 45.3% (n = 34) of respondents stated that they did not believe they could adequately assess patients with FMS and 41.3% (n = 31) reported that they had no training in the management of FMS. Private practitioners were significantly (P = 0.05) more likely to believe that physiotherapy was beneficial for patients with FMS than their NHS counterparts. In conclusion, physiotherapy treatments for patients with FMS in Northern Ireland are consistent with current evidence. However, practice varies and physiotherapists are uncomfortable with their level of training in FMS.

Purpose To provide formal expert consensus–based recommendations to practicing oncologists and others on the management of brain metastases for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) –positive advanced breast cancer. Methods The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) convened a panel of medical oncology, radiation oncology, guideline implementation, and advocacy experts and conducted a systematic review of the literature. When that failed to yield sufficiently strong quality evidence, the Expert Panel undertook a formal expert consensus–based process to produce these recommendations. ASCO used a modified Delphi process. The panel members drafted recommendations, and a group of other experts joined them for two rounds of formal ratings of the recommendations. Results No studies or existing guidelines met the systematic review criteria; therefore, ASCO conducted a formal expert consensus–based process. Recommendations Patients with brain metastases should receive appropriate local therapy and systemic therapy, if indicated. Local therapies include surgery, whole-brain radiotherapy, and stereotactic radiosurgery. Treatments depend on factors such as patient prognosis, presence of symptoms, resectability, number and size of metastases, prior therapy, and whether metastases are diffuse. Other options include systemic therapy, best supportive care, enrollment onto a clinical trial, and/or palliative care. Clinicians should not perform routine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to screen for brain metastases, but rather should have a low threshold for MRI of the brain because of the high incidence of brain metastases among patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer.

Purpose To provide an overview of rehabilitation medicine– and physical modality–based approaches to cancer pain management, and to highlight the fact that these approaches are generally used in conjunction and that a majority are focused on minimizing pain during periods of mobility and the performance of activities of daily living. Methods We performed a nonsystematic literature review and provide a description of the current standard of care. Results Rehabilitative and physical modalities used to manage pain can be grouped into four categories: those that modulate nociception, stabilize or unload painful structures, influence physiological processes that indirectly influence nociception, or alleviate pain arising from the overloading of muscles and connective tissues that often occurs after surgery or with sarcopenia in late-stage cancer. Most modalities have been pragmatically refined over the years, and many have an evidence base, although few have been explicitly validated in the oncologic setting. With few exceptions, they are patient controlled and free of adverse effects. Conclusion Physical modalities and rehabilitation medicine offer a range of pain management approaches that may serve as beneficial adjuncts to the conventional systemic and interventional analgesic strategies used to control cancer-related pain. These approaches may be particularly beneficial to patients with movement-associated pain and those who are ambivalent regarding pharmacoanalgesia.