Abstract PD4-03: Chemotherapy-related risk factors associated with lymphedema in breast cancer patients: Should repeated ipsilateral arm infusions be avoided?

Abstract Background: Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema (BCRL) is a chronic, iatrogenic condition that can occur after damage to the lymphatic system during surgery (sx) or radiation, precipitating edema of the arm, breast, or trunk. BCRL risk-reduction education is an essential component of clinical care, and practitioners often advise patients (pts) to avoid needle punctures on the treated arm when possible. There is, however, a lack of substantial scientific evidence to lessen patient distress. Considering the common use of chemotherapy (CT) agents in this population, we assessed whether repeated skin punctures on the ipsilateral arm for CT infusions increased the risk of BCRL compared to CT via central lines in a large, prospective cohort of breast cancer (BC) pts. Methods: We prospectively screened 630 pts with unilateral (487) or bilateral (143) BC sx receiving neoadjuvant (NAC) and/or adjuvant CT (AdjCT) for arm lymphedema (defined as volume change ≥10%) at our hospital from 2005–16. Pts were measured with a perometer pre-operatively and at 3–7 month follow-up intervals. Clinicopathologic and treatment (tx)-related characteristics, including details on CT regimen and the method of intravenous (IV) CT administration [peripheral IV catheters (PIVCs), central venous access devices (CVADs), peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs)] were obtained by chart review. Cox proportional hazard analyses were applied to ascertain the risk of BCRL associated with these factors. Results: The median post-op follow-up was 44 months. Of the 630 pts, 40% underwent axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), 60% underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) or no nodal sx, 16% and 89% received NAC or AdjCT, respectively. CT was administered via PIVCs inserted in the hand/arm for 59%, via CVADs or PICCs for 26%, and via both PIVCs at least once and CVADs/PICCs for 15%. The 2-yr cumulative incidence of BCRL was 12% (95% CI 9.9-15.2%). Multivariable regression results indicated that pts with both peripheral IV infusions on the arm and implanted CVADs did not have a higher risk of BCRL (HR(95% CI)=1.4(0.6-3.6)) than pts who received CT via CVADs only (1.7(0.7-3.8)). The overall number of NAC (p=0.24;0.9(95% CI 0.8-1.1)) or AdjCT cycles (p=0.78;1.0(0.9-1.1)) was not associated with BCRL, nor was the number of peripheral IV infusions (p=0.17;1.0(1.0-1.1)). BMI &amp;gt;30 (p&amp;lt;0.0001;3.4(1.9-6.0)) and number of positive lymph nodes (p=0.02;3.2(1.3-8.1)) were significantly associated with BCRL. Among those with PIVCs, pts with bilateral SLNB/ALND were more likely to develop BCRL than pts with unilateral sx (p&amp;lt;0.01;5.0(1.9-13.4)). Only 38% of the 32 bilateral pts with BCRL received at least one peripheral IV infusion on their ipsilateral arm. Conclusion: Results suggest that repeated skin punctures on the ipsilateral arm for CT infusions do not significantly increase the risk for BCRL compared to implanted CVADs, nor does the overall number of CT cycles. As survivors may be concerned about the risk of developing BCRL following sx and tx, healthcare practitioners should strive to mitigate pt worry during and well beyond the course of tx, educating pts about the lifestyle risk exposures for BCRL and precautionary guidelines not being definitive. Citation Format: Asdourian MS, Rao SR, Skolny MN, Salama L, Brunelle C, Seward C, Taghian AG. Chemotherapy-related risk factors associated with lymphedema in breast cancer patients: Should repeated ipsilateral arm infusions be avoided? [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD4-03.</jats:p

Cirurgias endoscópicas para a coluna torácica: avaliação crítica Endoscopic surgery for thoracic spine: critical review

Com o advento da tecnologia vídeo-assistida a endoscopia tem assumido importante papel terapêutico na cavidade torácica. Este artigo é uma avaliação crítica da literatura e tem como objetivo demonstrar o estado atual da cirurgia endoscópica direcionada para a coluna torácica. Hérnias discais, deformidades, infecções, tumores, doenças congênitas e traumatismos estão sendo tratados por técnica endoscópica. Na literatura, as vantagens sobre a toracotomia aberta são visibilidade aumentada e reduções em: tempo de recuperação, perda sanguínea, custos, índice de infecção e morbidade pós-operatória. Algumas desvantagens são: intubação seletiva, significativa curva de aprendizado, dificuldades técnicas na operação de crianças muito pequenas, reparação da dura máter e instrumentação. Embora os benefícios sejam aparentemente claros e haja pronunciado grau de entusiasmo, os autores são cautelosos em afirmar que a toracoscopia já é uma alternativa definitiva à toracotomia convencional. A comparação dos resultados entre as técnicas endoscópica e aberta é dificultada pela escassez de estudos comparativos. Os autores, embora otimistas, recomendam análises de mais estudos prospectivos, multicêntricos e randomizados para uma conclusão definitiva.<br>After the development of video-assisted technology, endoscopic techniques have assumed an important therapeutic role into thoracic cavity. This is a literature review article to show the current state of the endoscopy for thoracic spine. Disc herniations, deformities, infections, tumors, congenital disorders and traumatic events have been treated by endoscopic techniques. On reviewing the literature, the advantages over open approaches are: enhanced visualization, shorter recovery time and decreased blood loss, costs, infection rate and post operative morbidity. Some disadvantages are: one lung anesthesia, significant learning curve, and technical problems in operating on small children, repairing the dura and performing instrumentation. Overall benefits are apparently clear. However, despite the high degree of enthusiasm, authors are cautious to state that endoscopic techniques to the spine already represent a definitive alternative to standard techniques. Comparison between endoscopic and open approaches are still difficult because of the lack of appropriate comparative studies. Authors, although optimistic recommend more prospective, multicentric and randomized studies in order to stand a definitive conclusion

The Dosimetric Impact of Implants on the Spinal Cord Dose During Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy

Background The effects of spinal implants on dose distribution have been studied for conformal treatment plans. However, the dosimetric impact of spinal implants in stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatments has not been studied in spatial orientation. In this study we evaluated the effect of spinal implants placed in sawbone vertebra models implanted as in vivo instrumentations. Methods Four different spinal implant reconstruction techniques were performed using the standard sawbone lumbar vertebrae model; 1. L2-L4 posterior instrumentation without anterior column reconstruction (PI); 2. L2-L4 anterior instrumentation, L3 corpectomy, and anterior column reconstruction with a titanium cage (AIAC); 3. L2-L4 posterior instrumentation, L3 corpectomy, and anterior column reconstruction with a titanium cage (PIAC); 4. L2-L4 anterior instrumentation, L3 corpectomy, and anterior column reconstruction with chest tubes filled with bone cement (AIABc). The target was defined as the spinous process and lamina of the lumbar (L) 3 vertebra. A thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD, LiF:Mg,Ti) was located on the measurement point anterior to the spinal cord. The prescription dose was 8 Gy and the treatment was administered in a single fraction using a CyberKnife® (Accuray Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA). We performed two different treatment plans. In Plan A beam interaction with the rod was not limited. In plan B the rod was considered a structure of avoidance, and interaction between the rod and beam was prevented. TLD measurements were compared with the point dose calculated by the treatment planning system (TPS). Results and discussion In plan A, the difference between TLD measurement and the dose calculated by the TPS was 1.7 %, 2.8 %, and 2.7 % for the sawbone with no implant, PI, and PIAC models, respectively. For the AIAC model the TLD dose was 13.8 % higher than the TPS dose; the difference was 18.6 % for the AIABc model. In plan B for the AIAC and AIABc models, TLD measurement was 2.5 % and 0.9 % higher than the dose calculated by the TPS, respectively. Conclusions Spinal implants may be present in the treatment field in patients scheduled to undergo SBRT. For the types of implants studied herein anterior rod instrumentation resulted in an increase in the spinal cord dose, whereas use of a titanium cage had a minimal effect on dose distribution. While planning SBRT in patients with spinal reconstructions, avoidance of the rod and preventing interaction between the rod and beam might be the optimal solution for preventing unexpectedly high spinal cord doses.PubMedWoSScopu