Cutaneous adverse events in patients receiving anticancer therapy in a tertiary hospital setting: the old and the new.

BACKGROUND: Targeted therapies and immunotherapies are increasingly prescribed, but classic chemotherapy agents are still highly used in cancer treatment. Both therapies, the old and the new, are associated with cutaneous adverse events (CAEs) that can cause treatment interruptions or reduce the quality of life of patients. METHODS: An observational, cross-sectional, single-center study that included consecutive cancer patients presenting CAEs. The main objective was to describe CAEs derived from antineoplastic drugs. Secondary objectives were to determine the number and severity of CAEs and if there were differences regarding CAEs between conventional chemotherapeutics and targeted therapies. RESULTS: A total of 114 patients were included with a total number of 177 CAEs. Of the 114 patients, 64 presented a single CAE, 37 patients had two CAEs, and 13 patients presented three CAEs. The most frequent CAEs were pruritus, xerosis, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (PPE), and alopecia. The majority of CAEs were mild (63.2%), followed by moderate (29.9%) and severe (6.7%) CAEs. Of the 114 patients, 103 (90.3%) received topical agents and 11 (9.7%) required systemic treatment for the management of CAEs. Prophylactic treatment for CAE was delivered to only 4/114 (3.5%) patients. No significant differences were found in the number or severity of CAEs between conventional chemotherapy and targeted therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Close collaboration between oncologists and dermatologists is essential to start preventive measures on time, enhance patient education, and avoid unnecessary dose reductions or treatment interruptions. The multidisciplinary approach can offer better management of skin toxicities.

Unintentional lumbar facet joint injection guided by fluoroscopy during interlaminar epidural steroid injection: a retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: An epidural steroid injection (ESI) is a commonly administered procedure in pain clinics. An unintentional lumbar facet joint injection during interlaminar ESI was reported in a previous study, but there has not been much research on the characteristics of an unintentional lumbar facet joint injection. This study illustrated the imaging features of an unintentional lumbar facet joint injection during an interlaminar ESI and analyzed characteristics of patients who underwent this injection. METHODS: From December 2015 to May 2017, we performed 662 lumbar ESIs and we identified 24 cases (21 patients) that underwent a lumbar facet joint injection. We gathered data contrast pattern, needle approach levels and directions, injected facet joint levels and directions, presence of lumbar spine disease as seen on magnetic resonance images (MRI), and histories of lumbar spine surgeries. RESULTS: The contrast pattern in the facet joint has a sigmoid or ovoid contrast pattern confined to the vicinity of the facet joint. The incidence of unintentional lumbar facet joint injection was 3.6%. The mean age was 68.47 years. Among these 21 patients, 14 (66.7%) were injected in the facet joint ipsilaterally to the needle approach. Among the 20 patients who received MRI, all (100%) had central stenosis and 15 patients (75%) had severe stenosis. CONCLUSIONS: When the operator performs an interlaminar ESI on patients with central spinal stenosis, the contrast pattern on the fluoroscopy during interlaminar ESI should be carefully examined to distinguish between the epidural space and facet joint.

Ultrasound Guided Low Approach Interscalene Brachial Plexus Block for Upper Limb Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The interscalene brachial plexus block is widely used for pain control and anesthetic purposes during shoulder arthroscopic surgeries and surgeries of the upper extremities. However, it is known that interscalene brachial plexus block is not appropriate for upper limb surgeries because it does not affect the lower trunk (C8-T1, ulnar nerve) of the brachial plexus. METHODS: A low approach, ultrasound-guided interscalene brachial plexus block (LISB) was performed on twenty-eight patients undergoing surgery of the upper extremities. The patients were assessed five minutes and fifteen minutes after the block for the degree of block in each nerve and muscle as well as for any complications. RESULTS: At five minutes and fifteen minutes after the performance of the block, the degree of the block in the ulnar nerve was found to be 2.8 ± 2.6 and 1.1 ± 1.8, respectively, based on a ten-point scale. Motor block occurred in the median nerve after fifteen minutes in 26 of the 28 patients (92.8%), and in all of the other three nerves in all 28 patients. None of the patients received additional analgesics, and none experienced complications. CONCLUSIONS: The present study confirmed the achievement of an appropriate sensory and motor block in the upper extremities, including the ulnar nerve, fifteen minutes after LISB, with no complications.