Search

The aim of this study was to present our preliminary experience with transarterial radioembolization (TARE) using Yttrium-90 ( 90 Y), compare the cancer-specific survival (CSS) of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) liver metastases undergoing TARE, and investigate the influence of additional treatments on CSS. Our database was interrogated to retrieve patients who had undergone TARE using Yttrium-90 ( 90 Y) glass or resin microspheres. Kaplan-Meier curves and the log-rank test were employed to conduct survival analysis for the different groups ( p < 0.05). Thirty-nine patients were retrieved (sex: 27 M, 12 F; mean age: 63.59 ± 15.66 years): twenty-three with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and sixteen with CRC liver metastasis. Globally, the patients with HCC demonstrated a significantly longer CSS than those with CRC liver metastasis (22.64 ± 2.7 vs. 7.21 ± 1.65 months; p = 0.014). Among the patients with CRC liver metastasis, those receiving TARE and additional concomitant treatments (n = 10) demonstrated a longer CSS than the CRC patients receiving only TARE (9.97 ± 2.21 vs. 2.59 ± 0.24 months; p = 0.06). In the HCC group, there was a trend of a longer CSS in patients (n = 8) receiving TARE and additional treatments (27.89 ± 3.1 vs. 17.69 ± 3.14 months; p = 0.15). Patients with HCC seem to achieve a longer survival after TARE compared to patients with CRC liver metastases. In patients with CRC liver metastases, the combination of TARE and additional concomitant treatments may improve survival.

Patients with pacemakers need regular follow-ups which are demanding. Telemonitoring for pacemaker can provide a new opportunity to avoid follow-up visits. On the other hand, in-person visits could help patients with pacemakers to cope better with the anxiety linked to their condition and maintain better communication with their doctors than simple remote control of their device status. Therefore, our objective was to analyze the experiences and communication comparing telemonitoring (TM) versus conventional monitoring (CM) of patients with pacemakers. A single-center, controlled, non-randomized, non-blinded clinical trial was designed. Data were collected five years after implantation in a cohort of 89 consecutive patients assigned to two different groups: TM and CM. The 'Generic Short Patient Experiences Questionnaire' (GS-PEQ) was used to assess patients' experiences, and the Healthcare Communication Questionnaire (HCCQ) was used to measure the communication of patients with healthcare professionals. Additionally, an ad-hoc survey including items from the 'Telehealth Patient Satisfaction Survey' and a 'costs survey' was used. After five years, 55 patients completed the study (TM = 21; CM = 34). Participants' mean (±SD) age was 81 (±6.47), and 31% were females. No differences in baseline characteristics between groups were found. The comparative analyses TM versus CM showed some significant differences. According to GS-PEQ, TM users received adequate information about their diagnosis or afflictions (p = .035) and the treatment was better adapted to their situation (p = .009). Both groups reported negative experiences regarding their involvement in their treatment decisions, the waiting time before admission, and perceived a low-benefit. According to HCCQ, the TM group experienced poorer consultation management by the healthcare provider (p = .041). Participants reported positive overall communication experiences. The study provides insights into the experiences and communication in PM monitoring services as well as specific areas where users reported negative experiences such as the consultation management by clinicians. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02234245., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.