(C) 2010 American Institute of Physics. [doi:10.1063/1.3525997]“
“Methods: Twenty-eight patients for a CRT with cardiac defibrillator were implanted between October 2009 and May 2010 with a Quartet lead. Lead position, pacing parameters, stability, complications, and presence of phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS) data were collected at implant and predischarge. Follow-up CB-5083 cell line data were collected at 15 +/- 8 weeks for all patients.
Results: A Quartet lead was successfully implanted in 96% (27/28) of patients (age 61 +/- 15 years; 82% male; ischemic etiology 50%; mean left ventricular [LV] ejection fraction 25 +/- 7%; left bundle branch block 68%). PNS was seen at implant in 11 patients
(41%) with at least one vector. In eight of these cases (72%), the need for lead repositioning was averted by programming LV pacing utilizing the additional vectors available with the Quartet lead.
Conclusion: These initial data suggest that pacing with the Quartet lead is associated with a high implant success rate and stable pacing parameters acutely and at short-term follow-up.
The 10 LV pacing vectors available with this lead may allow PNS and capture threshold problems Evofosfamide mouse to be easily overcome. (PACE 2011; 34:484-489).”
“Aims: Post-lumpectomy breast radiation is the standard of care for all patient subgroups. However, elderly women with stage I breast cancer on adjuvant tamoxifen therapy have a 4% risk of local recurrence after lumpectomy without adjuvant breast radiation. The purpose of this study was to explore the attitudes of Canadian
radiation oncologists who treat breast cancer with respect to their use of adjuvant post-lumpectomy radiotherapy, and their willingness to implement a decision aid for this patient population.
Materials and methods: The questionnaire was mailed to 141 Canadian radiation oncologists who treat breast cancer. The respondents were asked to complete an online survey Selleck SNX-5422 consisting Of four parts: (1) demographic information; (2) factors determining post-lumpectomy radiation treatment decisions; (3) hypothetical case scenarios; (4) interest in using a decision aid in their practice.
Results: Among the 61 (43%) physicians who completed the survey, there was substantial response variation. After contraindications to radiotherapy, patient overall health and patient preference had the greatest influence on their decision to offer radiotherapy to this patient subgroup. Margin status and use of hormonal therapy were given less importance. For each of the case scenarios, 60-83% of physicians (depending on the case scenario) would offer the patient a choice; far fewer (12-57%) would be comfortable not irradiating. Sixty-four per cent of respondents welcomed the concept of a decision aid for this population.