RESUMO
Purpose@#This study aimed to investigate the differences in sleep disturbance changes between patients receiving two hormone therapies (“tamoxifen plus ovarian function suppression group [T+OFS group]” versus “tamoxifen group [T group]”) and the chronological changes in sleep disturbances in each group. @*Methods@#Premenopausal women with unilateral breast cancer who underwent surgery and were scheduled to receive hormone therapy (HT) with tamoxifen alone or with tamoxifen plus gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist for ovarian function suppression were included. The enrolled patients wore an actigraphy watch for two weeks and completed questionnaires (insomnia, sleep quality, physical activity [PA], and quality of life [QOL]) at five time points: immediately before HT and 2, 5, 8, and 11 months after HT. @*Results@#Among the 39 enrolled patients (21 and 18 patients in the T+OFS group and T group, respectively), 25 (17 and 8 patients in the T+OFS group and T group, respectively) were finally analyzed. There were no differences between the two groups in time-dependent changes in insomnia, sleep quality, total sleep time, rapid eye movement sleep rate, QOL, and PA;however, the severity of hot flashes was significantly higher in the T+OFS group than in the T group. Although the interaction between group and time was not significant, insomnia and sleep quality significantly worsened at 2–5 months of HT when changes over time were analyzed within the T+OFS group. In both the groups, PA and QOL were maintained without significant changes. @*Conclusion@#Unlike tamoxifen alone, tamoxifen plus GnRH agonist initially worsened insomnia and sleep quality, but gradually improved with long-term follow-up. Patients who initially experience insomnia during tamoxifen plus GnRH agonist administration can be reassured based on the results of this study, and active supportive care may be used during this period.
RESUMO
When a patient represents pain in foot, physician can easily overlook compression neuropathy of peripheral nerve as it is uncommon. Among nerve entrapment syndrome encountered in the foot, selective compression in lateral branch of deep peroneal nerve (DPN) is rare. We report a case of a patient with pain and dysesthesia in dorsolateral foot which turned out as lateral branch of deep peroneal nerve entrapment syndrome caused by talonavicular joint effusion. We would like to share diagnostic work up flow and conservative treatment courses. This case manifests the importance of the deep peroneal nerve and its branches in clinical setting of pain and ankle instability.
RESUMO
Radiation recall is an uncommon phenomenon in which administration of a chemotherapy or another systemic agent induces an acute inflammatory reaction in previously irradiated tissues, often weeks to years after completion of radiotherapy.Gemcitabine can induce an inflammatory reaction within an area of prior radiation. Radiation recall is known to medical oncologists, however only few cases have been reported in Korean journals, therefore physiatrist who diagnose and treat the treatment-related physical impairments of cancer patients must know about it. We emphasize the importance of knowledge of this phenomenon when considering the differential diagnosis of painful limb edema in a patient who has received cancer treatment.
RESUMO
Radiation recall is an uncommon phenomenon in which administration of a chemotherapy or another systemic agent induces an acute inflammatory reaction in previously irradiated tissues, often weeks to years after completion of radiotherapy.Gemcitabine can induce an inflammatory reaction within an area of prior radiation. Radiation recall is known to medical oncologists, however only few cases have been reported in Korean journals, therefore physiatrist who diagnose and treat the treatment-related physical impairments of cancer patients must know about it. We emphasize the importance of knowledge of this phenomenon when considering the differential diagnosis of painful limb edema in a patient who has received cancer treatment.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: To prevent surgical site complications, many plastic surgeons use the so-called “conventional protocol,” which immobilizes the shoulder and upper arm for 1 month after reconstruction. In an effort to improve the shoulder mobility of patients who received immediate breast reconstruction with tissue expander insertion (TEI), we introduced an early rehabilitation protocol with a short-term immobilization period of 2 weeks. This study aims to compare this early rehabilitation exercise program with the conventional protocol and to determine factors affecting shoulder mobility and quality of life of patients after immediate breast reconstruction. METHODS: A total of 115 patients with breast cancer who underwent reconstructive surgery were retrospectively reviewed. For patients who underwent reconstruction before January 2017, the conventional protocol was followed with immobilization of their shoulder for over 4 weeks. Patients who underwent reconstruction after January 2017 were educated to undergo a self-exercise program after a short-term immobilization period of 2 weeks. We compared shoulder mobility, pain, quality of life, and complications at postoperative 1 and 2 months between the groups. RESULTS: Patients who received early rehabilitation showed greater shoulder flexion and abduction range at postoperative 1 month than those who received the conventional protocol. This increased shoulder abduction range continued until postoperative 2 months. There were no significant surgical site problems in both groups during the 2 months of follow-up. CONCLUSION: To enhance the recovery of shoulder mobility, early rehabilitation with a shorter immobilization period should be recommended to patients with breast cancer undergoing reconstruction surgery with TEI. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03541161