Citations

Purpose: To report visual and anatomical outcomes after the repair of chronic idiopathic macular holes (MHs) with no face-down positioning. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of chronic MH cases of greater than 1-year duration that were repaired through pars plana vitrectomy with broad internal limiting membrane peeling and no face-down positioning between March 2009 and December 2017. There were 18 eyes of 18 patients that met inclusion criteria. Patients with MH duration of less than 1 year and without at least 1 month of follow-up were excluded. Macular hole staging and measurements were performed with spectral domain optical coherence tomography. Results: Mean MH duration was 5.0 ± 6.9 years. Two-thirds of MHs had a basal diameter of more than 1,000 μm. Mean preoperative Snellen visual acuity was 20/302 and improved to a mean postoperative visual acuity of 20/112 (P ≤ 0.0001). Visual acuity improved in all patients who achieved successful anatomical closure, 94.4% (17/18) of eyes. Conclusion and relevance: Patients in this series with chronic MH who underwent no-face-down MH repair demonstrated a high single-surgery anatomical closure rate with a significant improvement in visual acuity.

145 Background: Palliative radiation treatment (pRT) is used for symptomatic bone metastases (mets). Several fractionation schedules show equal efficacy for pain relief, and ASTRO’s Choosing Wisely recommends 8Gy x1, 4Gy x5, or 3Gy x10. This study aims to investigate the cost implications of pRT for bone mets. Methods: Patients (Pts) treated with pRT for bone mets at Mayo Clinic from 2007 - 2016 were included in this study. Costs for all services were subdivided into RT and total costs at 30 & 90 days (30D & 90D). Standardized costs were obtained from the Mayo Clinic Cost Data Warehouse and Medicare reimbursements were assigned to all services with cost to charge adjustments and 2017 GDP Implicit Price Deflator for inflation. Cost means were compared via the Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: 538 pts were treated with pRT, 124 receiving 8Gy x1, 204 receiving 4Gy x5, and 210 receiving 3Gy x10. Pts with breast and prostate cancer were most likely to be treated with 3Gy x10 and pts with GI and lung cancer were most likely to be treated with 8Gy x1. RT costs at 30D were $1,497, $1,891, and $1,982 (p=0.03) and RT costs at 90D were $2,602, $2,753, and $3,032 (p=0.08) for initial RT regimens of 8Gy x1, 4Gy x5, and 3Gy x10. Total costs of care at 30D were similar from $15,969 - 17,687 (p=0.6) and total costs at 90D were similar from $22,361 - 23,219 (p=0.7) between arms. A total of 23%, 28%, and 39% of pts were alive 2 years following pRT from each arm (p=0.07). Conclusions: This is the first study of its kind to analyze actual treatment costs for the three most common pRT regimens in bone mets. Single fraction RT was most used for pts with poor prognoses and was associated with lower RT costs at 30D, but similar RT costs at 90D, possibly due to retreatment. RT choice had no impact on overall costs of care at 30D or 90D. pRT remains of high value, representing only 11-13% of total costs.[Table: see text]

126 Background: Palliative radiation treatment (pRT) is a common and effective treatment for patients with symptomatic bone metastases. However, patients receiving RT for bone metastases often may have a poor performance status and are more likely to experience toxicity during or after treatment. This study aims to investigate the number and type of toxicity event occurring during or after pRT for bone metastases. Methods: Patients treated with RT for bone metastases at Mayo Clinic from 2007 to 2016 were included in this study. Demographic, disease, treatment, and toxicity information were collected. Specifically, toxicity events were identified as emergency department (ED) visits and inpatient hospitalization (IH) within 90 days, breaks in treatment >4 days, and excessive 30 day financial toxicity defined as standardized Medicare costs >1 standard deviation above the mean. RT treatment was compared by dose and fractionation via descriptive statistics. Results: A total of 538 patients treated with pRT were identified, 124 receiving 8Gy x1, 204 receiving 4Gy x5, and 210 receiving 3Gy x10. Patients with breast and prostate cancer were most likely to be treated with 3Gy x10 and patients with GI and Lung cancer were most likely to be treated with 8Gy x1. A description of the patient characteristics and toxicities are shown in Table 1. For 8Gy x1, 4Gy x5, and 3Gy x10 breaks in treatment were rare (0%, 2%, and 3.3%), ED visits (15%, 24%, & 28%), IH (12%, 23%, & 19%), and financial toxicity (13%, 18%, & 21%) were common. A total of 22.6%, 27.5%, and 38.6% of patients were alive two years following pRT from each group. Conclusions: Toxicity during or shortly after pRT of bone metastases is common. This study confirms that additional steps should be taken to monitor and mitigate toxicity in this vulnerable patient group. [Table: see text]

ABSTRACT The last decade has seen a sharp increase in the number of scientific publications describing physiological and pathological functions of extracellular vesicles (EVs), a collective term covering various subtypes of cell‐released, membranous structures, called exosomes, microvesicles, microparticles, ectosomes, oncosomes, apoptotic bodies, and many other names. However, specific issues arise when working with these entities, whose size and amount often make them difficult to obtain as relatively pure preparations, and to characterize properly. The International Society for Extracellular Vesicles (ISEV) proposed Minimal Information for Studies of Extracellular Vesicles (“MISEV”) guidelines for the field in 2014. We now update these “MISEV2014” guidelines based on evolution of the collective knowledge in the last four years. An important point to consider is that ascribing a specific function to EVs in general, or to subtypes of EVs, requires reporting of specific information beyond mere description of function in a crude, potentially contaminated, and heterogeneous preparation. For example, claims that exosomes are endowed with exquisite and specific activities remain difficult to support experimentally, given our still limited knowledge of their specific molecular machineries of biogenesis and release, as compared with other biophysically similar EVs. The MISEV2018 guidelines include tables and outlines of suggested protocols and steps to follow to document specific EV‐associated functional activities. Finally, a checklist is provided with summaries of key points.

Objectives: Patients and caregivers can experience a range of physical, psychologic, and cognitive problems following critical care discharge. The use of peer support has been proposed as an innovative support mechanism. Design: We sought to identify technical, safety, and procedural aspects of existing operational models of peer support, among the Society of Critical Care Medicine Thrive Peer Support Collaborative. We also sought to categorize key distinctions between these models and elucidate barriers and facilitators to implementation. Subjects and Setting: Seventeen Thrive sites from the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia were represented by a range of healthcare professionals. Measurements and Main Results: Via an iterative process of in-person and email/conference calls, members of the Collaborative defined the key areas on which peer support models could be defined and compared, collected detailed self-reports from all sites, reviewed the information, and identified clusters of models. Barriers and challenges to implementation of peer support models were also documented. Within the Thrive Collaborative, six general models of peer support were identified: community based, psychologist-led outpatient, models-based within ICU follow-up clinics, online, groups based within ICU, and peer mentor models. The most common barriers to implementation were recruitment to groups, personnel input and training, sustainability and funding, risk management, and measuring success. Conclusions: A number of different models of peer support are currently being developed to help patients and families recover and grow in the postcritical care setting.