Citations

Mayo Clinic

Clear

2 citation(s) found for "Pan, Jeff".

Audiological Outcomes of Weekly vs. Triweekly Cisplatin in Head and Neck Cancer with Cochlear-Sparing Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy
Gamez, Mauricio E. , Blakaj, Dukagjin , Bhateja, Priyanka, Custer, Amy , Klamer, Brett , Pan, Jeff, Gogineni, Emile , Baliga, Sujith , Bonomi, Marcelo , Bhateja, Priyanka , Bonomi, Marcelo , Pan, Jeff

Cancers | June 17, 2024 | Volume: 16 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 2228

10.3390/cancers16122228 | PMID 38927933 Get It

Cisplatin, one of the most ototoxic anti-neoplastic agents, causes permanent hearing loss in up to 90% of patients. We assessed ototoxicity rates and prospectively collected audiologic outcomes of patients receiving low-dose or high-dose cisplatin with concurrent cochlear-sparing intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) receiving definitive or adjuvant cisplatin-based chemoradiotherapy (CRT) were analyzed. Cisplatin was administered either in low doses weekly (40 mg/m2) for up to seven doses or in high doses triweekly (100 mg/m2) for up to three doses. Cochlear-sparing IMRT was delivered in all cases. Audiologic data were prospectively collected before, during, and after treatment completion. The primary endpoint was a hearing change grade of ≥3 after CRT completion. Of the 96 HNSCC patients evaluated, 69 received weekly cisplatin and 58 received definitive CRT. Of patients receiving weekly cisplatin, 13% developed ≥G3 ototoxicity vs. 56% of patients who received triweekly cisplatin (p < 0.001). In multivariable modeling, the cisplatin dose schedule remained significant (OR: 8.4, 95%CI: 2.8–27.8, p < 0.001) for risk of severe irreversible ototoxicity. Triweekly cisplatin CRT significantly increased the ≥G3 severe irreversible ototoxicity risk compared to low-dose weekly cisplatin, irrespective of the cumulative cisplatin dose, even with the use of cochlear-sparing IMRT. No significant difference in oncologic outcomes was observed between the two schedules.
Accuracy and reliability of determining the isometric point of the knee for multiligament knee reconstruction
Leiter, Jeff , Levy, Bruce A. , Stannard, James P. , Whelan, Daniel B. , Marx, Robert G. , Boyd, Joel L. , MacDonald, Peter B. , Fanelli, Gregory C. , Stuart, Michael J.

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | October 5, 2013 | Volume: 22 | Issue: 9 | Pages: 2187-2193

10.1007/s00167-013-2661-2 | PMID 24096377 Get It

AbstractPurposeTo compare the accuracy and reliability of the anatomic and radiographic techniques for identifying the isometric point of the knee.MethodsOnly four specimens were used; however, eight experienced multiligament knee injury surgeons were recruited to address this limitation. Surgeons estimated the isometric point (EIP) on the medial and lateral sides using an anatomic and radiographic method. The x and y coordinates of the EIP were compared to the true isometric point (TIP). T‐tests and interclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were performed to determine the accuracy and reliability between the methods.ResultsThere was no difference in placement of the EIP on the medial side of the knee in the anterior/posterior (x; p = n.s.) and superior/inferior direction (y;p = n.s). The EIP was anterior (p = 0.001) to the TIP with the radiographic method on the lateral side and approached significance (p = 0.05) in the superior/inferior direction. The ICC (95 % CI) for identifying the EIP on the medial side in the anterior/posterior direction using the anatomic method was 0.64 (0.28–0.96) and 0.11 (−0.06 to 0.77) in the superior/inferior direction. Using the radiographic method, the ICC in the anterior/posterior and superior/inferior direction was 0.49 (0.14–0.94) and 0.15 (−0.47 to 0.81), respectively. On the lateral side, the ICC for the anatomic method was 0.84 (0.56–0.99) in the anterior/posterior direction and 0.36 (0.05–0.90) in the superior/inferior direction. Using the radiographic method, the ICC in the anterior/posterior and superior/inferior direction was 0.61 (0.26–0.96) and 0.89 (0.67–0.99), respectively.ConclusionsThere was no difference in accuracy on the medial side of the knee. On the lateral side, the anatomic method was more accurate in the anterior/posterior direction. Reliability was greater in the anterior/posterior direction on both sides of the knee. Surgeons were most likely to place the isometric point anterior and superior to the TIP on both the medial and lateral sides of the knee with either method which has the potential to cause graft lengthening. This should be taken into consideration during reconstruction/repair of the MCL/PMC and LCL/PLC.