-
Palliative Medicine Jun 2021People with mesothelioma and their families have palliative care needs throughout the relatively short trajectory of their illness.
BACKGROUND
People with mesothelioma and their families have palliative care needs throughout the relatively short trajectory of their illness.
AIM
To describe the palliative care needs and experiences of people with mesothelioma and their family carers.
DESIGN
Integrative systematic review with narrative synthesis (PROSPERO: CRD42020190115).
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library were searched for articles published between 01 January 2000 and 10 May 2020. Articles were included if they presented empirical studies or comprehensive reviews including information about the palliative care needs and experiences of people with mesothelioma and their family carers.
RESULTS
The search yielded 508 articles, 14 were included in the analysis. A cross cutting theme of 'uncertainty' was identified encompassing five themes: (1) organisation and co-ordination of services, (2) communication and information needs, (3) management of care needs and high symptom burden, (4) consideration of the impact of seeking compensation and (5) family carer needs. Our findings demonstrate that people with mesothelioma want a co-ordinated, team-based approach to palliative care with a named point of contact. Whilst carers value and benefit from early referral to specialist palliative care, this does not necessarily reflect the outcomes and views of patients.
CONCLUSION
The evidence base around the palliative care needs and experiences of people with mesothelioma and their carers needs to be strengthened. The results of this review support the need to develop a greater understanding about the role non-specialist palliative care clinicians' play in providing generalist palliative care for people with mesothelioma and their carers.
Topics: Caregivers; Hospice and Palliative Care Nursing; Humans; Mesothelioma; Mesothelioma, Malignant; Palliative Care
PubMed: 33829930
DOI: 10.1177/02692163211007379 -
Thorax Jun 2021Conflicting results exist regarding whether preoperative transthoracic biopsy increases the risk of pleural recurrence in early lung cancer. We conducted a systematic,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Conflicting results exist regarding whether preoperative transthoracic biopsy increases the risk of pleural recurrence in early lung cancer. We conducted a systematic, patient-level meta-analysis to evaluate the risk of pleural recurrence in stage I lung cancer after percutaneous transthoracic lung biopsy.
METHODS
A systematic search of OVID-MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was performed through October 2018. Eligible studies were original articles on the risk of pleural recurrence in stage I lung cancer after transthoracic biopsy. We contacted the corresponding authors of eligible studies to obtain individual patient-level data. We used the Fine-Gray model for time to recurrence and lung cancer-specific survival and a Cox proportional hazards model for overall survival.
RESULTS
We analysed 2394 individual patient data from 6 out of 10 eligible studies. Compared with other diagnostic procedures, transthoracic biopsy was associated with a higher risk for ipsilateral pleural recurrence, which manifested solely (subdistribution HR (sHR), 2.58; 95% CI 1.15 to 5.78) and concomitantly with other metastases (sHR 1.99; 95% CI 1.14 to 3.48). In the analysis of secondary outcomes considering a significant interaction between diagnostic procedures and age groups, reductions of time to recurrence (sHR, 2.01; 95% CI 1.11 to 3.64), lung cancer-specific survival (sHR 2.53; 95% CI 1.06 to 6.05) and overall survival (HR 2.08; 95% CI 1.12 to 3.87) were observed in patients younger than 55 years, whereas such associations were not observed in other age groups.
DISCUSSION
Preoperative transthoracic lung biopsy was associated with increased pleural recurrence in stage I lung cancer and reduced survival in patients younger than 55 years.
Topics: Biopsy, Needle; Humans; Lung; Lung Neoplasms; Neoplasm Staging; Pleural Neoplasms
PubMed: 33723018
DOI: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2020-216492 -
Critical Reviews in Oncology/hematology Apr 2021The role of prophylactic irradiation of tracts (PIT) to prevent tumor seeding at the site of a diagnostic or therapeutic intervention in patients with malignant pleural... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
The role of prophylactic irradiation of tracts (PIT) to prevent tumor seeding at the site of a diagnostic or therapeutic intervention in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is controversial. This study aimed to determine the efficacy of PITs in preventing procedure tract metastases (PTM) after a chest wall procedure in MPM.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched various databases from inception date to April 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PIT with no PIT in patients who had a chest wall procedure for MPM. We assessed the risk of bias of individual RCT using the RoB2 tool. The primary outcome was the occurrence of PTM. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects model. We employed the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.
RESULTS
We identified five RCTs including 737 patients. Two RCTs had a low risk of bias. PIT was associated with a significant reduction in the odds of PTM (odd ratio, 0.55; 95 % confidence interval, 0.32 to 0.95; P-value = 0.03; I = 13 %; GRADE: moderate certainty). One RCT reported no difference in overall survival outcome with the use of PIT. None of the RCTs performed subgroup analyses. Sensitivity analyses showed similar results when limited to RCTs with low risk of bias.
CONCLUSION
PIT significantly reduces the occurrence of PTM in patients with MPM who had a diagnostic or therapeutic chest wall procedure.
Topics: Humans; Mesothelioma; Mesothelioma, Malignant; Neoplasm Seeding; Pleural Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33675903
DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2021.103278 -
Integrative Cancer Therapies 2021Branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs; leucine, isoleucine, and valine) are essential amino acids involved in immune responses, and may have roles in protein malnutrition... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs; leucine, isoleucine, and valine) are essential amino acids involved in immune responses, and may have roles in protein malnutrition and sarcopenia. Furthermore, certain liver diseases have been associated with a decreased Fischer's ratio (BCAAs to aromatic amino acids; phenylalanine, tyrosine, and tryptophan). We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of BCAAs use in patients with cancer undergoing surgery.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched (inception to July 24, 2020) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative observational studies in English evaluating BCAAs (alone or in combinations) during the oncological peri-operative period. Study selection, data extraction, and quality appraisal were done in duplicate. RCT risk-of-bias was appraised using Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool, and observational studies' quality assessment was conducted with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analyses were conducted when appropriate.
RESULTS
20 articles were included comprising 13 RCTs and 6 observational cohort studies in 7 reports and 2019 total participants overall. Among 13 RCTs, 77% involved liver cancer. Methodological study quality scored substantial risk-of-bias across most RCTs. Meta-analysis of RCTs found a 38% decreased risk of post-operative infections in BCAAs group compared to controls (RR = 0.62; 95% CI = 0.44 to 0.87; = .006; number of RCTs, = 6; total sample size, N = 389; = 0%). BCAAs were also found to be beneficial for ascites (RR = 0.55; 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.86; = .008; = 4; N = 296; = 0%), body weight (MD = 3.24 kg; 95% CI = 0.44 to 6.04; = .02; = 3; N = 196; = 24%), and hospitalization length (MD = -2.07 days; 95% CI = -3.97 to -0.17; = .03; = 5; N = 362; = 59%). No differences were found between BCAAs and controls for mortality, recurrence, other post-operative complications (liver failure, edema, pleural effusion), blood loss, quality of life, ammonia level, and prothrombin time. No serious adverse events were related to BCAAs; however, serious adverse events were reported due to intravenous catheters. No safety concerns from observational studies were identified.
CONCLUSIONS
Branched-chain amino acids during the oncological surgical period demonstrated promise in reducing important post-operative morbidity from infections and ascites compared to controls. Blinded, placebo-controlled confirmatory trials of higher methodological quality are warranted, especially using oral, short-term BCAAs-enriched supplements within the context of recent ERAS programs.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION
CRD42018086168.
Topics: Amino Acids, Branched-Chain; Dietary Supplements; Humans; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Postoperative Complications; Quality of Life
PubMed: 33648360
DOI: 10.1177/1534735421997551 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2021Breast cancer is one of the most common cancers among women. Surgical removal of the cancer is the mainstay of treatment; however, tumour handling during surgery can... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Breast cancer is one of the most common cancers among women. Surgical removal of the cancer is the mainstay of treatment; however, tumour handling during surgery can cause microscopic dissemination of tumour cells and disease recurrence. The body's hormonal response to surgery (stress response) and general anaesthesia may suppress immunity, promoting tumour dissemination. Paravertebral anaesthesia numbs the site of surgery, provides good analgesia, and blunts the stress response, minimising the need for general anaesthesia.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of paravertebral anaesthesia with or without sedation compared to general anaesthesia in women undergoing breast cancer surgery, with important outcomes of quality of recovery, postoperative pain at rest, and mortality.
SEARCH METHODS
On 6 April 2020, we searched the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group (CBCG); CENTRAL (latest issue), in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (via OvidSP); Embase (via OvidSP); the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal; and ClinicalTrials.gov for all prospectively registered and ongoing trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in adult women undergoing breast cancer surgery in which paravertebral anaesthesia with or without sedation was compared to general anaesthesia. We did not include studies in which paravertebral anaesthesia was given as an adjunct to general anaesthesia and then this was compared to use of general anaesthesia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted details of trial methods and outcome data from eligible trials. When data could be pooled, analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis, and the random-effects model was used if there was heterogeneity. When data could not be pooled, the synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) approach was applied. The GRADE approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
Nine studies (614 participants) were included in the review. All were RCTs of parallel design, wherein female patients aged > 18 years underwent breast cancer surgery under paravertebral anaesthesia or general anaesthesia. None of the studies assessed quality of recovery in the first three postoperative days using a validated questionnaire; most assessed factors affecting quality of recovery such as postoperative analgesic use, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), hospital stay, ambulation, and patient satisfaction. Paravertebral anaesthesia may reduce the 24-hour postoperative analgesic requirement (odds ratio (OR) 0.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01 to 0.34; 5 studies, 305 participants; low-certainty evidence) compared to general anaesthesia. Heterogeneity (I² = 70%) was attributed to the fixed dose of opioids and non-steroidal analgesics administered postoperatively in one study (70 participants), masking a difference in analgesic requirements between groups. Paravertebral anaesthesia probably reduces the incidence of PONV (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.30; 6 studies, 324 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), probably results in a shorter hospital stay (mean difference (MD) -79.39 minutes, 95% CI -107.38 to -51.40; 3 studies, 174 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and probably reduces time to ambulation compared to general anaesthesia (SWiM analysis): percentages indicate vote counting based on direction of effect (100%, 95% CI 51.01% to 100%; P = 0.125; 4 studies, 375 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Paravertebral anaesthesia probably results in higher patient satisfaction (MD 5.52 points, 95% CI 1.30 to 9.75; 3 studies, 129 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) on a 0 to 100 scale 24 hours postoperatively compared to general anaesthesia. Postoperative pain at rest and on movement was assessed at 2, 6, and 24 postoperative hours on a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale (VAS). Four studies (224 participants) found that paravertebral anaesthesia as compared to general anaesthesia probably reduced pain at 2 postoperative hours (MD -2.95, 95% CI -3.37 to -2.54; moderate-certainty evidence). Five studies (324 participants) found that paravertebral anaesthesia may reduce pain at rest at 6 hours postoperatively (MD -1.54, 95% CI -3.20 to 0.11; low-certainty evidence). Five studies (278 participants) found that paravertebral anaesthesia may reduce pain at rest at 24 hours postoperatively (MD -1.19, 95% CI -2.27 to -0.10; low-certainty evidence). Differences in the methods of two studies (119 participants) and addition of clonidine to the local anaesthetic in two studies (109 participants), respectively, contributed to the heterogeneity (I² = 96%) observed for these two outcomes. Two studies (130 participants) found that paravertebral anaesthesia may reduce pain on movement at 6 hours (MD-2.57, 95% CI -3.97 to -1.17) and at 24 hours (MD -2.12, 95% CI -4.80 to 0.55; low-certainty evidence). Heterogeneity (I² = 96%) was observed for both outcomes and could be due to methodological differences between studies. None of the studies reported mortality related to the anaesthetic technique. Eight studies (574 participants) evaluated adverse outcomes with paravertebral anaesthesia: epidural spread (0.7%), minor bleeding (1.4%), pleural puncture not associated with pneumothorax (0.3%), and Horner's syndrome (7.1%). These complications were self-limiting and resolved without treatment. No data are available on disease-free survival, chronic pain, and quality of life. Blinding of personnel or participants was not possible in any study, as a regional anaesthetic technique was compared to general anaesthesia. Risk of bias was judged to be serious, as seven studies had concerns of selection bias and three of detection bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Moderate-certainty evidence shows that paravertebral anaesthesia probably reduces PONV, hospital stay, postoperative pain (at 2 hours), and time to ambulation and results in greater patient satisfaction on the first postoperative day compared to general anaesthesia. Paravertebral anaesthesia may also reduce postoperative analgesic use and postoperative pain at 6 and 24 hours at rest and on movement based on low-certainty evidence. However, RCTs using validated questionnaires are needed to confirm these results. Adverse events observed with paravertebral anaesthesia are rare.
Topics: Adult; Analgesia; Anesthesia Recovery Period; Anesthesia, General; Anesthesia, Spinal; Bias; Breast Neoplasms; Early Ambulation; Female; Horner Syndrome; Humans; Incidence; Intention to Treat Analysis; Length of Stay; Nerve Block; Pain Measurement; Pain, Postoperative; Patient Satisfaction; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stress, Physiological
PubMed: 33629404
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012968.pub2 -
Diseases of the Esophagus : Official... Feb 2021Esophagectomy is the gold-standard treatment for esophageal cancer; however, postoperative anastomotic leakage remains the primary concern for surgeons. No consensus...
Esophagectomy is the gold-standard treatment for esophageal cancer; however, postoperative anastomotic leakage remains the primary concern for surgeons. No consensus exists on the optimal investigations to predict an anastomotic leak. This systematic review aims to identify a single test or combination of tests with acceptable sensitivity and specificity to identify anastomotic leak after esophagectomy and to formulate a diagnostic algorithm to facilitate surgical decision-making. A systematic review of PubMed and EMBASE databases was undertaken to evaluate diagnostic investigations for anastomotic leak post-esophagectomy. Each study was reviewed and where possible, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were extracted. The review identified 3,204 articles, of which 49 met the inclusion criteria. Investigations most commonly used for diagnosis of anastomotic leak were: C-reactive protein (CRP), oral contrast imaging, computed tomography (CT), pleural drain amylase concentration, and the 'NUn score'. The sensitivity of CRP for detecting anastomotic leak varied from 69.2% to 100%. Oral contrast studies sensitivities varied between 16% and 87.5% and specificity varied from 20% to 100%. Pleural drain amylase sensitivities ranged between 75% and 100% and specificity ranged from 52% to 95.5%. The NUn score sensitivities ranged from 0% to 95% and specificity from 49% to 94.4%. No single investigation was identified to rule out anastomotic leak in asymptomatic patients. However, the authors propose a diagnostic algorithm incorporating CRP, pleural drain amylase concentration, and CT with oral contrast to aid clinicians in predicting anastomotic leak to facilitate safe, timely discharge post-esophagectomy.
Topics: Anastomosis, Surgical; Anastomotic Leak; Esophageal Neoplasms; Esophagectomy; Humans
PubMed: 33565590
DOI: 10.1093/dote/doaa076 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Aug 2021Chemical pleurodesis is an important option for palliation in malignant pleural effusion (MPE). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Chemical pleurodesis is an important option for palliation in malignant pleural effusion (MPE).
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the status of iodopovidone for pleurodesis in MPE.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of PubMed and EMBASE databases to identify studies evaluating the role of iodopovidone for pleurodesis in MPE. We calculated the pooled success rate of iodopovidone pleurodesis from observational studies and the risk ratio (RR) of successful pleurodesis (compared to other agents) from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We pooled the data using the random-effects model. We also assessed the safety of iodopovidone.
RESULTS
We included 26 studies (n = 1132, 15 observational, and 11 RCTs) in our review. The pooled success rate (95% confidence interval [CI]) from 15 observational studies (n = 648) was 90% (86-94). The efficacy rate of iodopovidone was similar with either tube thoracostomy or thoracoscopy. Eleven (n = 484) RCTs compared the efficacy of iodopovidone with other agents (especially bleomycin and talc). We found a similar success rate of iodopovidone compared to other agents with a pooled RR (95% CI) of 0.99 (0.91-1.08). The most frequent adverse event was chest pain. No hypo or hyperthyroidism, or visual disturbance was encountered in any study. There were no deaths attributed to iodopovidone use.
CONCLUSIONS
Iodopovidone is a safe and effective agent for pleurodesis in the management of MPE. Further confirmation is required since the available evidence is limited by the low quality and small sample size of the included studies.
Topics: Aged; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Pleural Effusion, Malignant; Pleurodesis; Povidone-Iodine
PubMed: 33515303
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-021-06004-3 -
Journal of Palliative Medicine Aug 2021The current cost of treatment of malignant pleural effusion (MPE) with an indwelling pleural catheter (IPC) is unclear. We propose a review of the scientific evidence...
The current cost of treatment of malignant pleural effusion (MPE) with an indwelling pleural catheter (IPC) is unclear. We propose a review of the scientific evidence on the cost and effectiveness of this therapeutic option. Systematic review of the literature on the cost and effectiveness of the treatment of MPE by IPC, according to the PRISMA methodology and quality according to the scientific guidelines. A total of 4 articles, 152 patients, and 159 IPCs were included. The use of IPC was associated with improvement in symptoms and quality of life. The most common complications were infections (empyema in 20.9% of patients and cellulitis in 17.3%); 9% of cases were hospitalized due to complications, and <2% required subsequent procedures. The average cost of IPC (set/drainage bottles) ranged from €2,025.6 to €1,200.5 if it was placed on an outpatient basis, €1,100 if survival was <6 weeks, and €4,028 in patients with mesothelioma. Complications increased the cost, and taking into account follow-up visits, additional tests, and days of admission for complications, the cost was >€5,000. Compared with pleurodesis, the cost of IPC was significantly lower when patient survival was <14 weeks, but not when survival was longer or home care was required. The use of IPC is associated with good control of MPE and seldom requires many subsequent procedures; however, it is also associated with a certain rate of complications, which may increase costs. However, ambulatory management may help reduce costs, which are directly related to the type of tumor, the duration of survival, and the need for specialized treatment.
Topics: Catheters, Indwelling; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Drainage; Humans; Pleural Effusion, Malignant; Pleurodesis; Quality of Life; Talc
PubMed: 33395352
DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2020.0695 -
General Thoracic and Cardiovascular... May 2021Malignant pleural effusion is a severe and common complication in patients with primary or metastatic malignancies of the pleura. Although talc pleurodesis is widely... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Malignant pleural effusion is a severe and common complication in patients with primary or metastatic malignancies of the pleura. Although talc pleurodesis is widely used for managing malignant pleural effusions, there is still controversy in the literature regarding its superiority compared to other approaches. We conducted this meta-analysis to further investigate its efficacy compared to alternative interventions.
METHODS
We systematically reviewed the PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus databases to identify studies that fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Study quality was evaluated using validated tools and the pooled Risk Ratio (RR) and confidence interval (CI) were calculated. We performed sensitivity analyses based on the meta-analysis method and type of study.
RESULTS
Twenty-four studies were included in the current systematic review meta-analysis. Talc pleurodesis was associated with statistically significant higher successful pleurodesis rates when compared with all controls [RR (95% CI) 1.15 (1.00, 1.31); P = 0.04], only chemical controls [RR (95% CI) 1.26 (1.13, 1.40); P < 0.0001], and bleomycin [RR (95% CI) 1.22 (1.05, 1.42); P = 0.008]. The comparison between talc pleurodesis and controls at the > 1-month follow-up time point favored talc pleurodesis [RR (95% CI): 1.62 (1.15, 2.27); P = 0.005]. Finally, talc poudrage was associated with a statistically significant higher successful pleurodesis rate when compared with all controls. Sensitivity analyses verified the robustness of our results.
CONCLUSION
Talc pleurodesis is an effective MPE management approach presenting borderline statistically significant superiority compared to control methods especially compared to bleomycin as well as when pleurodesis success is evaluated later than 1 month postoperatively.
Topics: Bleomycin; Humans; Pleural Effusion, Malignant; Pleurodesis; Talc
PubMed: 33222091
DOI: 10.1007/s11748-020-01549-2 -
Surgery Today Jul 2021The prognosis of peritoneal carcinomatosis is poor. However, the emergence of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS + HIPEC) as a... (Review)
Review
The role of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis: a systematic review including evidence from Japan.
The prognosis of peritoneal carcinomatosis is poor. However, the emergence of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS + HIPEC) as a treatment option has prolonged survival and it can even potentially cure patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. Randomized controlled studies and other observational studies indicated that this combined therapy potentially improved the prognosis of patients with colon, gastric, and ovarian cancers with acceptable morbidity and mortality rates. Even in rarer diseases, such as pseudomyxoma peritonei and malignant peritoneal mesothelioma, CRS + HIPEC markedly improved the prognoses over those with conventional treatment. Based on the accumulated evidence, clinical guidelines recommend CRS + HIPEC for selected patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. However, several issues still need to be overcome. A standard method for HIPEC has not yet been established. Furthermore, the criteria employed for patient selection need to be clarified to achieve real benefits. The peritoneal cancer index, chemo-sensitivity and several biological markers are considered to be key factors.
Topics: Aged; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Colonic Neoplasms; Combined Modality Therapy; Cytoreduction Surgical Procedures; Female; Humans; Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy; Japan; Male; Mesothelioma, Malignant; Middle Aged; Observational Studies as Topic; Ovarian Neoplasms; Peritoneal Neoplasms; Pseudomyxoma Peritonei; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stomach Neoplasms
PubMed: 33185798
DOI: 10.1007/s00595-020-02180-7