Search

In recent years, we have seen the integration of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) simulators into radiotherapy centres and the emergence MR linear accelerators (MR-linac). Currently, there are limited studies to demonstrate the clinical effectiveness of MRI guided radiotherapy (MRIgRT) treatment for breast cancer patients. The objective of this scoping review was to identify and map the existing evidence surrounding the clinical implementation of MRIgRT for breast cancer patients. We also identified the challenges and knowledge gaps in the literature. The scoping review was reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) extension for Scoping Reviews reporting guidelines. Titles and abstracts were screened by two independent reviewers. Quantitative and qualitative data were extracted and summarised using thematically organised tables. Results identify that accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) is the most common form of treatment for MRIgRT. The presence of the magnet does not affect target coverage or violate organ at risk (OAR) constraints compared to standard radiotherapy methods. Consideration is advised for skin and chest wall (CW) due to the electron return effect (ERE) and areas such as armpit and chin due to the electron stream effect (ESE). Clinically, bolus has been used to protect and prevent unwanted dose in these areas. Overall treatment for APBI on the MR-linac is feasible.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, we have seen the incorporation of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) simulators into radiotherapy centres and the emergence of the new technology of MR linacs. However, the significant health care resources associated with this advanced technology impact immediate widespread use and availability. There are currently limited studies to demonstrate the clinical effectiveness and inform decision-making on the use of MRI in radiotherapy. The objective of this scoping review is to identify and map the existing evidence surrounding the clinical implementation of MRI-guided radiotherapy in patients with breast cancer. It also aims to identify challenges and knowledge gaps in the literature. METHODS: We will perform a comprehensive search in MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from January 2010 onwards. Grey literature sources will include the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We will include systematic reviews, randomised and non-randomised controlled studies published in English. Literature should examine the use of magnetic resonance imaging-guided radiotherapy in adults with breast cancer, regardless of cancer stage or severity. Two reviewers will independently screen all titles, abstracts and full-text reports. Data will be extracted and summarised using qualitative (e.g. content and thematic analysis) methods and presented in tables. DISCUSSION: The results from this review will consolidate the evidence surrounding MRI-guided radiotherapy for breast cancer, contributing to the development and optimisation of patient selection, simulation, planning, treatment delivery, quality assurance and research, to help improve patient outcomes, cancer care and treatment for women with breast cancer. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: The protocol is available on Open Science Framework at DOI https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/8TEV6.

PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the use of a radiopaque tissue fiducial marker (TFM) in the treatment of prostate cancer patients who undergo post-prostatectomy radiotherapy (PPRT). TFM safety, its role and benefit in quantifying the set-up uncertainties in patients undergoing PPRT image-guided radiotherapy were assessed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 45 consecutive PPRT patients underwent transperineal implantation of TFM at the level of vesicourethral anastomosis in the retrovesical tissue prior to intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Prostate bed motion was calculated by measuring the position of the TFM relative to the pelvic bony anatomy on daily cone-beam computed tomography. The stability and visibility of the TFM were assessed in the initial 10 patients. RESULTS: No postoperative complications were recorded. A total of 3,500 images were analysed. The calculated prostate bed motion for bony landmark matching relative to TFM were 2.25 mm in the left-right, 5.89 mm in the superior-inferior, and 6.59 mm in the anterior-posterior directions. A significant 36% reduction in the mean volume of rectum receiving 70 Gy (rV70) was achieved for a uniform planning target volume (PTV) margin of 7 mm compared with the Australian and New Zealand Faculty of Radiation Oncology Genito-Urinary Group recommended PTV margin of 10 mm. CONCLUSION: The use of TFM was safe and can potentially eliminate set-up errors associated with bony landmark matching, thereby allowing for tighter PTV margins and a consequent favourable reduction in dose delivered to the bladder and rectum, with potential improvements in toxicities.

INTRODUCTION: Burn care represents a healthcare and economic burden to patients internationally. Choice of the most clinically effective treatment strategies requires evidence which is best obtained through high-quality randomised controlled trials (RCT). The number of published RCTs of burn care is increasing. However, trial quality and reporting standards are unclear. This study will assess the risk of bias and adequacy of reporting in recent burn care RCTs using tools endorsed by the Cochrane Collaboration. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic literature review will be undertaken, assessing parallel group RCTs evaluating therapeutic interventions for patients with cutaneous burns. Literature searches will use Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. Separate searches for each database will include medical subject heading and free text terms including 'burn', 'scald', 'thermal injury' and 'RCT'. Two reviewers will independently assess each study for inclusion. Risk of bias (RoB) will be assessed with the revised tool (RoB 2) and reporting completeness with the CONsolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 guidelines. We will report a narrative synthesis of all studies, including domain specific, and overall risk of bias for the primary outcome of each trial. Inter-rater agreement for RoB 2 will be reported using Fleiss's Kappa. For adherence to the CONSORT guidelines, we will generate a completeness of reporting index for the five domains. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics approval is required because published documents will be used. Findings of the study will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018111020.

INTRODUCTION: To examine the long-term outcomes of high dose rate brachytherapy boost (HDR-BT) combined with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer patients. METHODS: Data from 95 patients who underwent combined EBRT (50.4 Gy) and HDR-BT to the prostate between 2010 and 2017 were retrospectively analysed. Biochemical progression free survival (bPFS), local recurrence free survival (LRFS), metastatic free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier method. Regression analysis was conducted to identify important predictors of outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 24 patients received an initial HDR-BT dose of 18 Gy in three fractions, with the remaining 71 patients receiving 16 Gy in two fractions as per departmental protocol changes. Most patients (88%) received androgen deprivation therapy. A transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) was performed in 14 patients and hydrogel spacers (HS) were used in 30 patients. Median follow-up was 58 months. The 5-year bPFS, LRFS, MFS and OS were 92%, 100%, 92% and 88%. Univariate regression revealed no statistical association between patient characteristics and time to relapse (all P > 0.1). Late > grade 2 genitourinary (GU) toxicity was 6.3%. The use of HS or prior TURP had no impact on late GU toxicity. Late Grade 1 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity was 5.3%. CONCLUSION: The combined HDR-BT with EBRT resulted in excellent bPFS. The cumulative risk of late GU and GI toxicity was low and can be further improved with preventative strategies such as a pre-emptive TURP and/or HS insertion.

PURPOSE: To report on rectal dosimetric and toxicity outcomes of intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer patients undergoing combined high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) with or without hydrogel spacer (HS) insertion. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 97 patients were analyzed in this study, with 32 patients (33%) who had HS insertion compared with a preceding group of 65 patients (67%) without HS. HS safety, the dosimetric effects on organs at risk (rectal, urethral, penile bulb, and bladder) as well as gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary toxicity were evaluated and compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The median prostate-rectal separation achieved with HS was 10 mm (range, 5-14 mm). There were no post-operative complications following HS insertion. Patients with HS had significantly lower radiation dose to the rectum across all rectal dose volumes from rV30 to rV80, whether in absolute volume (cc) or as percentage of contoured OAR (p < 0.001). There was also significantly less acute > grade 1 GI toxicity (12.5% vs. 30.8%, p = 0.05) and a trend towards less late grade 1 GI toxicity (0% vs. 7.7%; p = 0.11) in the HS group compared to the non-HS group. CONCLUSIONS: Insertion of HS in prostate cancer patients receiving combined HDR and EBRT is safe and has resulted in a significant radiation dose reduction to the rectum, resulting in significantly less acute GI toxicity and a trend towards less late GI toxicity.

AIM: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the performance of two methodological instruments to appraise systematic reviews and to identify potential disagreements of systematic review authors regarding risk of bias (RoB) evaluation of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in systematic reviews on peri-implant diseases. MATERIAL/METHODS: We searched Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PubMed Central, and Google Scholar for systematic reviews on peri-implant diseases published before July 11, 2017. Two authors independently evaluated the RoB and methodological quality of the systematic reviews by applying the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) tool and Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) checklist, respectively. We assessed the RoB scores of the same RCTs published in different systematic reviews. RESULTS: Of the 32 systematic reviews identified, 23 reviews addressed the clinical topic of peri-implantitis. A high RoB was detected for most systematic reviews (n=25) using ROBIS, whilst five systematic reviews displayed low methodological quality by AMSTAR. Almost 30% of the RoB comparisons (for the same RCTs) had different RoB ratings across systematic reviews. CONCLUSIONS: The ROBIS tool appears to provide more conservative results than AMSTAR checklist. Considerable disagreement was found among systematic review authors rating the same RCT included in different systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVE: To report on the dosimetric benefits and late toxicity outcomes after injection of hydrogel spacer (HS) between the prostate and rectum for patients treated with prostate radiotherapy (RT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 76 patients with a clinical stage of T1-T3a prostate cancer underwent general anaesthesia for fiducial marker insertion plus injection of the HS into the perirectal space before intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) or volumetric-modulated arc RT (VMAT). HS safety, dosimetric benefits, and the immediate- to long-term effects of gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity were assessed. RESULTS: There were no postoperative complications reported. The mean (range) prostate size was 66.0 (25.0-187.0) mm. Rectal dose volume parameters were observed and the volume of rectum receiving 70 Gy (rV70 ), 75 Gy (rV75 ) and 78 Gy (rV78 ) was 7.8%, 3.6% and 0.4%, respectively. In all, 21% of patients (16/76) developed acute Grade 1 GI toxicities, but all were resolved completely by 3 months after treatment; whilst, 3% of patients (2/76) developed late Grade 1 GI toxicities. No patients had acute or late Grade ≥2 GI toxicities. CONCLUSION: Injection of HS resulted in a reduction of irradiated rectal dose volumes along with minimal GI toxicities, irrespective of prostate size.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to conduct a methodological assessment of paper-based systematic reviews (SR) published in oral health using a validated checklist. A secondary objective was to explore temporal trends on methodological quality. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two electronic databases (OVID Medline and OVID EMBASE) were searched for paper-based SR of interventions published in oral health from inception to October 2014. Manual searches of the reference lists of paper-based SR were also conducted. Methodological quality of included paper-based SR was assessed using an 11-item questionnaire, Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) checklist. Methodological quality was summarized using the median and inter-quartile range (IQR) of the AMSTAR score over different categories and time periods. RESULTS: A total of 643 paper-based SR were included. The overall median AMSTAR score was 4 (IQR 2-6). The highest median score (5) was found in the pain dentistry and periodontology fields, while the lowest median score (3) was found in implant dentistry, restorative dentistry, oral medicine, and prosthodontics. The number of paper-based SR per year and the median AMSTAR score increased over time (median score in 1990s was 2 (IQR 2-3), 2000s was 4 (IQR 2-5), and 2010 onwards was 5 (IQR 3-6)). CONCLUSION: Although the methodological quality of paper-based SR published in oral health has improved in the last few years, there is still scope for improving quality in most evaluated dental specialties. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Large-scale assessment of methodological quality of dental SR highlights areas of methodological strengths and weaknesses that can be targeted in future publications to encourage better quality review methodology.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews may provide less biased evidence than narrative reviews because they observe a strict methodology, similarly to primary studies. Hence, for clinical research questions, systematic reviews should be the study design of choice. It would be important to evaluate the prevalence and characteristics of narrative and systematic reviews published in prominent medical journals. Researchers and clinicians give great value to articles published in such scientific journals. This study sought to evaluate the prevalence and characteristics of narrative and systematic reviews in the five highest-ranked general medical journals and investigate the associations among type of review, number of citations, and impact factor (IF). METHODS: We surveyed the five highest-ranked medical journals (The New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, The Journal of the American Medical Association, The BMJ, and Annals of Internal Medicine) for narrative and systematic reviews published between June 2015 and June 2016. We independently selected and extracted the data from the reviews by strictly following the pre-determined eligibility criteria (Systematic and narrative reviews that focused on the management of diseases). We conducted regression analyses to investigate the associations among review type, number of citations, and IF. We also descriptively reported narrative reviews containing some methodology that might be reproducible. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-five reviews were included: 75 (27%) systematic; 126 (46%) narrative with some methodology reported, and 74 (27%) narrative reviews. In comparison to systematic reviews, narrative reviews were more frequently published in journals with higher IF (risk ratio [RR] = 1.114 (95% CI 1.080 to 1.149). Systematic reviews received more citations than narrative reviews (group formed by narrative and narrative with some methodology reported (RR = 0.985 95% CI 0.978 to 0.991). CONCLUSIONS: Non-systematic evidence is th

BACKGROUND: Autologous split skin grafting is the gold standard in treating patients with massive burns. However, the limited availability of donor sites remains a problem. The aim of this study is to present our experience with the modified Meek technique of grafting, outcomes achieved and recommendations for optimized outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patient records from our tertiary referral burn centre and the Bi-National Burns Registry to identify all patients who had modified Meek grafting between 2010 and 2013. Patient records were reviewed individually and information regarding patient demographics, mechanism of injury and surgical management was recorded. Outcome measures including graft take rate, requirement for further surgery and complications were also recorded. RESULTS: Eleven patients had modified Meek grafting procedures. The average age of patients was 46 years old (range 23 - 64). The average total body surface area (TBSA) burnt was 56.75 % (range 20-80 %). On average, 87 % of the grafted areas healed well and did not require regrafting. In the regrafted areas, infection was the leading cause of graft failure. CONCLUSIONS: Modified Meek grafting is a useful method of skin expansion. Similar to any other grafting technique, infection needs to be sought and treated promptly. It is recommended for larger burns where donor sites are not adequate or where it is desirable to limit their extent.

The objective of this study was to determine rates of positive bacterial cultures in patients with extensive toxic epidermal necrolysis, the rate of bacteremia, whether empirical antibiotics had been commenced, and their effectiveness when commenced. The authors conducted a retrospective chart review of patients with extensive toxic epidermal necrolysis between January 2001 and December 2012 admitted to the Victorian Adult Burns Service, Melbourne, Australia, with respect to the amount of positive cultures, number and type of organisms identified, whether empirical antibiotics had been commenced, and whether antibiotics were effective against organisms cultured. A total of 27 patients were admitted over the study period of 11 years. Seventeen of these patients developed at least one positive bacterial culture. Patients who grew positive cultures had a longer length of stay in intensive care unit and in hospital overall compared with patients who did not grow positive cultures. Thirty-five positive cultures were collected overall, with empirical antibiotics commenced in 22 cases. In terms of sensitivity, antibiotics were appropriate in 19 cases. Four patients developed bacteremia, two of whom died. This study does not dispute the generally accepted practice of avoiding prophylactic antibiotics in toxic epidermal necrolysis patients, but in the context of a relatively low rate of bacteremia in this patient population, advises appropriate and targeted empirical antibiotic use where clinical infection is suspected.Copyright © 2014 by the American Burn Association.

Introduction: Our aim was to provide descriptive information to burn clinicians, who have extensive experience treating major burns and determining prognosis, as to whether significant differences in mortality exist between major burns injuries and the comparatively less common toxic epidermal necrolysis for a given age and total body surface area percentage. Method(s): Retrospective data was analyzed of all deceased patients admitted to the Victorian Adult Burns Service in Melbourne, Australia over a period of 10 years with greater than 30% total body surface area burned or greater than 30% total body surface area epidermal detachment in the case of toxic epidermal necrolysis. Retrospective data was also collected on all patients, survivors and deceased, with toxic epidermal necrolysis and these patients were matched with burns patients by age and % total body surface area burned. Comparisons in outcomes were performed with mortality being the primary variable of interest. Result(s): Toxic epidermal necrolysis patients that died were older (median: 68.5 vs 57 yrs; P = 0.04), had a longer length of hospital stay (36.5 vs 0.8 days; P = 0.001) and significantly longer periods of mechanical ventilation (1404 vs 14.5 h; P = 0.011) than major burns patients that died. When toxic epidermal necrolysis patients were matched to major burns patients by age and total body surface area burned, there were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to mortality. Conclusion(s): Palliative care approaches are more frequently administered at the time of presentation for major burns patients in comparison to toxic epidermal necrolysis patients. This may be due to a perception that if toxic epidermal necrolysis patients can survive their initial systemic injury, they are likely to survive, as opposed to major burns patients who often undergo extensive surgery and for whom other factors should be taken into account in the context of end-of-life decision making.Copyr

Background: Toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) is a rare but fatal condition characterised by cutaneous exfoliation of the dermoepidermal layer and mucosal surfaces. Extensive TEN with epidermal detachment >30% of the total body surface area has been associated with a high mortality. Objective(s): This study aims to evaluate factors associated with mortality in extensive TEN. In the absence of data to qualify scoring systems such as SCORTEN, this study also aims to evaluate the use of the auxiliary score as a tool for calculating expected mortality. Method(s): A retrospective chart review of all patients presenting to our burns service with extensive TEN was undertaken. Application and evaluation of the auxiliary score was also undertaken for this patient population. Result(s): In extensive TEN, age and delay in admission to a burns centre were factors associated with mortality. Applying the auxiliary score to our patient population, there were no significant differences between expected mortality and observed mortality. Conclusion(s): Mortality was associated with age and delay in definitive treatment in extensive TEN. Whilst SCORTEN is the gold standard prognostic tool for patients with TEN, in the absence of SCORTEN values, the auxiliary score provides an alternative scoring system to evaluate expected mortality.Copyright © 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel.

INTRODUCTION: Despite technical advancements in breast radiation therapy, cardiac structures are still subject to significant levels of irradiation. As the use of adjuvant radiation therapy after breast-conserving surgery continues to improve survival for early breast cancer patients, the associated radiation-induced cardiac toxicities become increasingly relevant. Our primary aim was to evaluate the cardiac-sparing benefits of the deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) technique. METHODS: An electronic literature search of the PubMed database from 1966 to July 2014 was used to identify articles published in English relating to the dosimetric benefits of DIBH. Studies comparing the mean heart dose of DIBH and free breathing treatment plans for left breast cancer patients were eligible to be included in the review. Studies evaluating the reproducibility and stability of the DIBH technique were also reviewed. RESULTS: Ten studies provided data on the benefits of DIBH during left breast irradiation. From these studies, DIBH reduced the mean heart dose by up to 3.4 Gy when compared to a free breathing approach. Four studies reported that the DIBH technique was stable and reproducible on a daily basis. According to current estimates of the excess cardiac toxicity associated with radiation therapy, a 3.4 Gy reduction in mean heart dose is equivalent to a 13.6% reduction in the projected increase in risk of heart disease. CONCLUSION: DIBH is a reproducible and stable technique for left breast irradiation showing significant promise in reducing the late cardiac toxicities associated with radiation therapy.

Background Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN) is characterized by an exfoliative rash resembling widespread burns. It is often considered on the same spectrum of disease as Stevens Johnson Syndrome but is distinguished by epidermal detachment of >30% of total body surface area (TBSA). Ocular involvement of TEN may result in complications requiring intensive topical, systemic or operative treatment. This study aimed to identify the current hospital management of, and factors associated with, ophthalmic involvement in adult TEN patients. Methods All adult TEN patients admitted to the Victorian Adult Burns Service over an 12-year period were included. Retrospective data analyzed included patient demographics, site of TEN involvement, % TBSA, complications, duration of ocular follow up and visual outcomes. Results TEN patients with and without ocular involvement were compared. Cutaneous involvement of the head and neck was found to be significantly associated with ocular involvement of TEN. Age, TBSA involvement, presence of a prodrome, and presence of comorbidities were not found to be significantly associated with ocular involvement. Management of ophthalmic involvement of TEN varied between patients. Conclusions Clinicians should have a high index of suspicion for ocular involvement when exfoliation of the head and neck is present and should seek ophthalmological advice early in the course of disease. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI.