Citations

AbstractBackgroundNausea and vomiting are classic symptoms of gastroparesis. It remains unclear if characteristics of nausea and vomiting are similar in different etiologies of gastroparesis. The aims of this article were as follows: to describe characteristics of nausea and vomiting in patients with gastroparesis and to determine if there are differences in nausea and vomiting in diabetic (DG) and idiopathic gastroparesis (IG).MethodsGastroparetic patients enrolling in the NIDDK Gastroparesis Registry underwent assessment with history and questionnaires assessing symptoms, quality of life, and a questionnaire characterizing nausea and vomiting.Key ResultsOf 159 gastroparesis patients (107 IG, 52 DG), 96% experienced nausea, whereas 65% experienced vomiting. Nausea was predominant symptom in 28% and vomiting was predominant in 4%. Nausea was severe or very severe in 41%. PAGI‐SYM nausea/vomiting subscore was greater with increased vomiting severity, but not nausea severity in DG than IG. Nausea was related to meals in 71%; lasting most of the day in 41%. Increasing nausea severity was related to decreased quality of life. Nausea often preceded vomiting in 82% of patients and vomiting often relieved nausea in 30%. Vomiting was more common in DG (81%) compared to IG (57%; p = 0.004). Diabetic patients more often had vomiting in the morning before eating, during the night, and when not eating.Conclusions & InferencesNausea is present in essentially all patients with gastroparesis irrespective of cause and associated with decreased quality of life. In contrast, vomiting was more prevalent, more severe, and occurred more often in DG than IG. Thus, characteristics of vomiting differ in IG vs DG.

Study Design. Prospective cohort study. Objective. To characterize the accuracy of patient recollection of preoperative symptoms after lumbar spine surgery. Summary of Background Data. Although patient-reported outcomes have become important in the evaluation of spine surgery patients, the accuracy of patient recall remains unknown. Methods. Patients undergoing lumbar decompression with or without fusion were enrolled. Back and leg Numeric Pain Scores and Oswestry Disability Indices were recorded preoperatively. Patients were asked to recall their preoperative status at a minimum of 1 year after surgery. Actual and recalled scores were compared using paired t tests and relations were quantified using Pearson correlation coefficients. Multivariable linear regression was used to identify factors that affected recollection. Results. Sixty-two patients with a mean age of 66.1 years were included. Compared to their preoperative scores, patients showed significant improvement in back pain (mean difference [MD] = −3.2, 95% CI −4.0 to −2.4), leg pain (MD −3.3, 95% CI −4.3 to −2.2), and disability (MD −25.0%, 95% CI −28.7 to −19.6). Patient recollection of preoperative status was significantly more severe than actual for back pain (MD +2.3, 95% CI 1.5–3.2), leg pain (MD +1.8, 95% CI 0.9–2.7), and disability (MD +9.6%, 95% CI 5.6–14.0). No significant correlation between actual and recalled scores with regards to back (r = 0.18) or leg (r = 0.24) pain and only moderate correlation with disability (r = 0.44) were seen. This was maintained across age, sex, and time between date of surgery and recollection. More than 40% of patients switched their predominant symptom from back pain to leg pain or leg pain to back pain on recall. Conclusion. Relying on patient recollection does not provide an accurate measure of preoperative status after lumbar spine surgery. Recall bias indicates the importance of obtaining true baseline scores and patient-reported outcomes prospectively and not retrospectively. Level of Evidence: 2

Introduction Primary tumors of the spine requiring enbloc resection are rare. Most published reports are small and focus on disease free survival and recurrence rates. Very few studies focus on the various anterior and posterior reconstructive options and subsequent outcomes with respect to fusion rates and need for revision due to hardware failure. The objective of this review was to (1) summarize the published literature and (2) report the failure rates of various anterior and posterior reconstructive techniques after enbloc resection of spinal tumors and (3) supplement the deficiencies in the available published literature with expert opinion for reconstructive options from a group of experienced international spine tumor surgeons. Material and Methods An electronic search of the literature was undertaken from January 1990 – December 2013 evaluating specific reconstructive techniques of the spine after primary tumor enbloc resection. Prospective/retrospective trials and case series were included in the final analysis when fusion rates or failure rates were reported. The data available for each reconstructive technique was then combined and construct survivorship was summarized. In addition, a questionnaire was administered to a group of 20 international spine tumor surgeons evaluating specific reconstructive preferences at different regions of the spine based on the number of vertebrae resected and whether post-operative radiation was planned. Results The initial search yielded 381 articles with 31 subsequently included for full text review. Fourteen articles were included in the final analysis. There were 146 patients included for final review. There were 2/9 (22%) patients revised from short to long segment constructs and 3 reports of broken pedicle screws with only one requiring revision in longer constructs. Rates of revision for anterior reconstruction were similar for autogenous strut grafts (10%), cages (7.7%) and allograft strut grafts (8.3%). No surgeons responding to the questionnaire recommended short segment posterior constructs. For anterior reconstruction, cages packed with morcellized allograft and autograft were preferred (75%, p < 0.05) while strut bone grafting was choosen more often at the cervicothoracic junction (65%, p < 0.05) and when more than one vertebrae was resected in the mid thoracic spine (75%, p < 0.05). Few surgeons changed their anterior reconstructive technique (15%) or posterior reconstructive technique (10%) when post-operative radiation was planned. Conclusion The literature and consensus opinion supports posterior reconstruction with at least two vertebral levels of support above and below. For anterior vertebral column reconstruction, structural allograft, autograft and cages packed with morcelized bone have shown similar rates of fusion and failure. Expert opinion, however, suggests that structural autograft or potentially vascularized strut grafts should be used when spanning a defect greater than 2 vertebral bodies especially at the cervicothoracic junction.

Osteosarcoma is an aggressive primary bone tumor. It is currently treated with multimodality therapy including en bloc resection, which has been demonstrated to confer a survival benefit over intralesional resection. The authors present the case of an 8-year-old girl with a C-1 lateral mass osteosarcoma, which was treated with a 4-stage en bloc resection and spinal reconstruction. While technically complex, the feasibility of en bloc resection for spinal osteosarcoma should be explored in the pediatric population.

OBJECTIVE Primary spinal osteosarcomas are rare and aggressive neoplasms. Poor outcomes can occur, as obtaining marginal margins is technically demanding; further Enneking-appropriate en bloc resection can have significant morbidity. The goal of this study is to identify prognostic variables for local recurrence and mortality in surgically treated patients diagnosed with a primary osteosarcoma of the spine. METHODS A multicenter ambispective database of surgically treated patients with primary spine osteosarcomas was developed by AOSpine Knowledge Forum Tumor. Patient demographic, diagnosis, treatment, perioperative morbidity, local recurrence, and cross-sectional survival data were collected. Tumors were classified in 2 cohorts: Enneking appropriate (EA) and Enneking inappropriate (EI), as defined by pathology margin matching Enneking-recommended surgical margins. Prognostic variables were analyzed in reference to local recurrence and survival. RESULTS Between 1987 and 2012, 58 patients (32 female patients) underwent surgical treatment for primary spinal osteosarcoma. Patients were followed for a mean period of 3.5 ± 3.5 years (range 0.5 days to 14.3 years). The median survival for the entire cohort was 6.7 years postoperative. Twenty-four (41%) patients died, and 17 (30%) patients suffered a local recurrence, 10 (59%) of whom died. Twenty-nine (53%) patients underwent EA resection while 26 (47%) patients underwent EI resection with a postoperative median survival of 6.8 and 3.7 years, respectively (p = 0.048). EI patients had a higher rate of local recurrence than EA patients (p = 0.001). Patient age, previous surgery, biopsy type, tumor size, spine level, and chemotherapy timing did not significantly influence recurrence and survival. CONCLUSIONS Osteosarcoma of the spine presents a significant challenge, and most patients die in spite of aggressive surgery. There is a significant decrease in recurrence and an increase in survival with en bloc resection (EA) when compared with intralesional resection (EI). The effect of adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapeutics, as well as method of biopsy, requires further exploration.

Abstract Objective: Hypoparathyroidism is a rare disorder characterized by hypocalcemia and absent or deficient PTH. This report presents a summary of current information about epidemiology, presentation, diagnosis, clinical features, and management and proposes guidelines to help clinicians diagnose, evaluate, and manage this disorder. Participants: Participants in the First International Conference on the Management of Hypoparathyroidism represented a worldwide constituency with acknowledged interest and expertise in key basic, translational, and clinical aspects of hypoparathyroidism. Three Workshop Panels were constituted to address questions for presentation and discussion at the Conference held in Florence, Italy, May 7–9, 2015. At that time, a series of presentations were made, followed by in-depth discussions in an open forum. Each Workshop Panel also met in closed sessions to formulate the three evidence-based reports that accompany this summary statement. An Expert Panel then considered this information, developed summaries, guidelines, and a research agenda that constitutes this summary statement. Evidence: Preceding the conference, each Workshop Panel conducted an extensive literature search as noted in the individual manuscripts accompanying this report. All presentations were based upon the best peer-reviewed information taking into account the historical and current literature. Consensus Process: This report represents the Expert Panel's synthesis of the conference material placed in a context designed to be relevant to clinicians and those engaged in cutting-edge studies of hypoparathyroidism. Conclusions: This document not only provides a summary of our current knowledge but also places recent advances in its management into a context that should enhance future advances in our understanding of hypoparathyroidism.

Abstract As anticancer therapies designed to target specific molecular pathways have been developed, it has become critical to develop methods to assess the response induced by such agents. Although traditional, anatomic CT, and MRI examinations are useful in many settings, increasing evidence suggests that these methods cannot answer the fundamental biologic and physiologic questions essential for assessment and, eventually, prediction of treatment response in the clinical trial setting, especially in the critical period soon after treatment is initiated. To optimally apply advances in quantitative imaging methods to trials of targeted cancer therapy, new infrastructure improvements are needed that incorporate these emerging techniques into the settings where they are most likely to have impact. In this review, we first elucidate the needs for therapeutic response assessment in the era of molecularly targeted therapy and describe how quantitative imaging can most effectively provide scientifically and clinically relevant data. We then describe the tools and methods required to apply quantitative imaging and provide concrete examples of work making these advances practically available for routine application in clinical trials. We conclude by proposing strategies to surmount barriers to wider incorporation of these quantitative imaging methods into clinical trials and, eventually, clinical practice. Our goal is to encourage and guide the oncology community to deploy standardized quantitative imaging techniques in clinical trials to further personalize care for cancer patients and to provide a more efficient path for the development of improved targeted therapies. Clin Cancer Res; 22(2); 284–90. ©2016 AACR.

AbstractMeningioma is by far the most common primary intracranial tumor in adults. Treatment of meningioma is complex due to a tremendous amount of variability in tumor behavior. Many patients are incidentally found to have tumors that will remain asymptomatic throughout their lives. It is important to identify these patients so that they can be spared from potentially morbid interventions. On the other end of the spectrum, high-grade meningiomas can behave very aggressively. When treatment is necessary, surgical resection is the cornerstone of meningioma therapy. Studies spanning decades have demonstrated that extent of resection correlates with prognosis. Radiation therapy, either in the form of external beam radiation therapy or stereotactic radiosurgery, represents another important therapeutic tool that can be used in place of or as a supplement to surgery. There are no chemotherapeutic agents of proven efficacy against meningioma, and chemotherapy treatment is generally reserved for patients who have exhausted surgical and radiotherapy options. Ongoing and future studies will help to answer unresolved questions such as the optimum use of radiation in resected WHO grade II meningiomas and the efficacy of additional chemotherapy agents.