Comparison of 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional conformal treatment plans in gastric cancer radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative chemoradiotherapy is accepted as standard treatment for stage IB-IV, M0 gastric cancer. Radiotherapy (RT) planning of gastric cancer is important because of the low radiation tolerance of surrounding critical organs. The purpose of this study was to compare the dosimetric aspects of 2-dimensional (2D) and 3-dimensional (3D) treatment plans, with the twin aims of evaluating the adequacy of 2D planning fields on coverage of planning target volume (PTV) and 3D conformal plans for both covering PTV and reducing the normal tissue doses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-six patients with stage II-IV gastric adenocarcinoma were treated with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy using 3DRT. For each patient, a second 2D treatment plan was generated. The two techniques were compared for target volume coverage and dose to normal tissues using dose volume histogram (DVH) analysis. RESULTS: 3DRT provides more adequate coverage of the target volume. Comparative DVHs for the left kidney and spinal cord demonstrate lower radiation doses with the 3D technique. CONCLUSIONS: 3DRT produced better dose distributions and reduced radiation doses to left kidney and spinal cord compared to the 2D technique. For this reason it can be predicted that 3DRT will result in better tumor control and less normal tissue complications.

Pediatricians manage anaphylaxis poorly regardless of episode severity.

BACKGROUND: No information exists on how the knowledge or the practice of pediatricians regarding anaphylaxis episodes vary with episode severity. The aim of this study was to assess and compare pediatrician knowledge on the management of mild and severe anaphylaxis using clinical scenarios and to determine factors that affect their decisions. METHODS: A questionnaire consisting of eight questions on the diagnosis and management of anaphylaxis was distributed at two national congresses. A uniform answer box including possible response choices was given below each question, and respondents were asked to check the answers that they thought appropriate. The management of mild and severe anaphylaxis was examined using two clinical case scenarios involving initial treatment, monitoring, and discharge recommendations. RESULTS: Four hundred and ten questionnaires were analyzed. The percentage of pediatricians who correctly answered all questions on the management of mild and severe anaphylaxis scenarios was 11.3% and 3.2%, respectively. Pediatricians did significantly better with initial treatment, but they were less knowledgeable with respect to observation time and discharge criteria in the mild anaphylaxis case scenario compared with the severe one (both P < 0.001). Multiple logistic regression analysis identified only working in an emergency department or intensive care unit as significantly predicting correct diagnosis of anaphylaxis among pediatricians (P = 0.01, 95% confidence interval: 0.11-0.57). No pediatrician-related factors predicted physician knowledge on the management of anaphylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatricians have difficulty with different steps in managing mild and severe anaphylaxis. Their deficiencies in management may result in failure to prevent recurrences of mild anaphylaxis and may increase mortality in severe anaphylaxis.

Surgical treatment of liver metastases from colorectal cancer: experience of a single institution.

BACKGROUND: This report analyses an experience with 42 liver resections for metastatic colorectal carcinoma. METHODS: Forty-two patients underwent curative resection for liver metastasis from colorectal cancer between January 2004 and December 2007, with a follow up period that ranged from 3 to 66 months. In this retrospective study, early postoperative 30 day mortality and morbidity in addition to the effects of Dukes' stage, type of resection, number and size of the tumor, synchronous or metachronous metastases, resection margin, sex, age and chemotherapy protocol on three year survival were analyzed retrospectively. Univariate analyses of survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate analysis was evaluated using Cox regression method. The value of P<0.05 was accepted as significant. RESULTS: Early postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were 7.14% and 0%, respectively. Fourteen patients died during the follow-up period of 3 to 66 months (mean, 40.40±12.87). Median survival was 56 months and three year survival rate was 71.30%. Recurrence occurred in 11 patients (26.00%) after liver resection and additional surgery was performed for two of them. At univariate analysis, the number of tumors (<4), tumor size (<4 cm), type of resection and negative resection margins were significantly correlated with three year survival. Sex, age, Dukes' stage, synchronous or metachronous metastasis, recurrence and chemotherapy protocol were not predictive of long-term prognosis. Multivariate analysis revealed that tumor size>4 cm and presence of more than four tumors before surgery were associated with a 5.89 and 2.18-fold increased risk of death, respectively. CONCLUSION: Curative resection is one of the most important treatment options that can demonstrate long-term survival for patients.

Training of trainers on epinephrine autoinjector use.

The majority of physicians do not know how to use epinephrine autoinjectors. This displays that current education of physicians on anaphylaxis is inadequate for a thorough practice. We hypothesize that a theoretical lecture together with a practical session on epinephrine autoinjector use will improve its proper use by physicians. Residents, specialists, and consultants from General Pediatrics excluding allergists and allergy fellows were included in this study. All physicians were given an eight-item questionnaire followed by a practical session scoring and timing ability to use epinephrine autoinjector trainer. This ensued with one-to-one hands-on training on correct autoinjector use. Finally, a joint theoretical lecture on anaphylaxis including re-demonstration of epinephrine autoinjector use was given. All physicians were scored a second time on use of epinephrine autoinjector 6 months later. One hundred fifty-one of 196 participants completed all steps of the study in four tertiary hospitals. Correct use of epinephrine autoinjector improved from 23.3% to 74.2%, mean score from 3.49 ± 1.14 to 4.66 ± 0.65, need for prospectus from 91.4% to 29.1%, and mean time to administer autoinjector from 28.01 ± 6.22 s to 19.62 ± 5.01 s (p < 0.001 for each). The rate of most common mistakes during autoinjector use decreased but the ranking did not change. An integrated theoretical and practical education increased correct of epinephrine autoinjector use by physicians. Ongoing mistakes despite this education may be related with its design.

Repeatability and variation of quantitative gait data in subgroups of patients with stroke.

We aimed to determine the repeatability and variation of quantitative gait data in patients with stroke and to compare the subgroups in terms of gait variability. Time-distance and kinematic characteristics of gait were evaluated in 90 inpatients (30 women) with hemiparesis (mean+/-S.D. age 57.7+/-12.5 years and time since stroke 5.99+/-6.46 months). Subgroups were based on "gender", "side of paresis", "lesion type", "motor recovery level", "sensory status", "time since stroke" and "walking velocity". Repeatability was adequate to excellent in all stroke subgroups (ICC range 0.48-0.98). Walking velocity was the most repeatable gait parameter after stroke. Variation in step length was significantly higher in women than in men (CV 16% versus 9%, p<0.05). Slow walkers (walking velocity <0.34 m/s) had a higher variation than fast walkers in step length (CV 12.5% versus 7.5%, p<0.01), single support time (CV 11.9% versus 6.3%, p<0.05), peak hip extensions in stance (CV 11.5% versus 3.7%, p<0.01) and knee flexion in swing (CV 11.8% versus 6.5%, p<0.05). In our stroke patients, their age, time since injury, lesion characteristics, impaired proprioception or level of motor recovery had no effect on gait variability. For better interpretation of quantitative gait data, clinicians should consider that variation in step length, single support time, peak hip extension in stance and knee flexion in swing differs according to walking velocity after stroke.