Radiotherapy in the treatment of Graves ophthalmopathy—to do it or not?

To the objective of this study is to evaluate the role and toxicity of radiotherapy in the treatment of Graves ophthalmopathy. In the years 2000–2003, 121 patients with malignant exophthalmos were treated with radiotherapy of the retrobulbar area to the total dose of 20 Gy in ten fractions with a 6 MeV photon beam. The treatment was performed by the team of the Clinic of Oncology of the Jagiellonian University Medical College in Cracow. The radiotherapy was preceded by intravenous steroid therapy: methylprednisolone acetate administered at the dose of 2 g/week for four consecutive weeks. The highest efficacy, expressed as improvement of all ocular symptoms, was observed for the combined treatment. Female and non-diabetic patients responded positively to the combined treatment. Radiotherapy combined with steroid therapy in the treatment of Graves ophthalmopathy seems to be an effective treatment for strictly defined indications. In the treatment of Graves–Basedow disease, radiotherapy is a well-tolerated treatment modality. Diabetes is a factor that worsens prognosis in Graves ophthalmopathy and female sex is a favourable factor for this condition

Health information technology: use it well, or don't! Findings from the use of a decision support system for breast cancer management.

The potential of health information technology is hampered by new types of errors which impact is not totally assessed. OncoDoc2 is a decision support system designed to support treatment decisions of multidisciplinary meetings (MDMs) for breast cancer patients. We evaluated how the way the system was used had an impact on MDM decision compliance with clinical practice guidelines. We distinguished "correct navigations" (N+), "incorrect navigations" (N-), and "missing navigations" (N0), according to the quality of data entry when using OncoDoc2. We collected 557 MDM decisions from three hospitals of Paris area (France) where OncoDoc2 was routinely used. We observed 33.9% N+, 36.8% N-, and 29.3% N0. The compliance rate was significantly different according to the quality of navigations, 94.2%, 80.0%, and 90.2% for N+, N-, and N0 respectively. Surprinsingly, it was better not to use the system (N0) than to use it improperly (N-)

Physicians' Attitudes Towards the Advice of a Guideline-Based Decision Support System: A Case Study With OncoDoc2 in the Management of Breast Cancer Patients.

When wrongly used, guideline-based clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) may generate inappropriate propositions that do not match the recommendations provided by clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). The user may decide to comply with or react to the CDSS, and her decision may finally comply or not with CPGs. OncoDoc2 is a guideline-based CDSS for breast cancer management. We collected 394 decisions made by multidisciplinary meeting physicians in three hospitals where the CDSS was evaluated. We observed a global CPG compliance of 86.8% and a global CDSS compliance of 75.4%. Non-CPG compliance was observed in case of a negative reactance to the CDSS, when users did not follow a correct CDSS proposition (8.6% of decisions). Because of errors in patient data entry, OncoDoc2 delivered non-recommended propositions in 21.3% of decisions, leading to compliances with CDSS and CPGs of respectively 21.4% and 65.5%, whereas both compliances exceeded 90% when CDSS advices included CPG recommendations. Automation bias, when users followed an incorrect CDSS proposition explained the remaining non-compliance with CPGs (4.6% of decisions). Securing the use of CDSSs is of major importance to warranty patient safety and benefit of their potential to improve care

Systemic exposure to intracameral vs topical mydriatic agents: in cataract surgery

Jose Guell,1 Anders Behndig,2 Uwe Pleyer,3 Stéphane Jaulerry,4 Pascal Rozot,5 Pierre-Jean Pisella,6 Pierre-Yves Robert,7 Ines Lanzl,8 Sayeh Pourjavan,9 Carlos Aguiar,10 Joaquin Fernandez,11 Gunther Grabner,12 Rita Mencucci,13 Frédéric Chiambaretta,14 Marc Labetoulle15 On behalf of the Intracameral Mydrane (ICMA) and Ethics Group 1Cornea and Refractive Surgery Unit, Instituto de Microcirugía Ocular, Barcelona, Spain; 2Department of Clinical Science/Ophthalmology, Umeå University Hospital, Umeå, Sweden; 3Universitäts-Augenklinik, Charité Campus Virchow-Klinik, Berlin, Germany; 4Centre Hospitalier de Bigorre, Tarbes, France; 5Clinique Monticelli, Marseille, France; 6Hôpital Bretonneau, CHRU de Tours, Tours, France; 7Hôpital Dupuytren, CHU de Limoges, Limoges, France; 8Chiemsee Augen Tagesklinik, Prien, Germany; 9Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Bruxelles, Belgium; 10Hospital de Santo Antonio, Porto, Portugal; 11Hospital Torrecárdenas, Almeria, Spain; 12Universitätsklinik Für Augenheilkunde Und Optometrie, Der Paracelsus, Austria; 13AOU Careggi, Clinica Oculistica, Università Degli Studi di Firenze, Firenze, Italy; 14Hôpital Gabriel Montpied, CHU de Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand, France; 15Hôpital Bicêtre, Université Paris Sud, Paris, France Objective: The objective of this study was to compare systemic exposure to tropicamide/phenylephrine following intracameral or topical administration before cataract surgery. Patients and methods: Mydriatics exposure was calculated in patients randomized to intracameral fixed combination of mydriatics and anesthetic ([ICMA]: tropicamide 0.02%, phenylephrine 0.31%, and lidocaine 1%, N=271) or mydriatic eye drops ([EDs]: tropicamide 0.5% and phenylephrine 10%, N=283). Additional doses were permitted if required. Mydriatic plasma levels were determined by mass spectrometric HPLC in 15 patients per group before and after administration.Results: Most ICMA patients (73.6%) received a single dose (200 µL) representing an exposure to tropicamide of 0.04 mg and phenylephrine of 0.62 mg. None of these patients received additional mydriatics. In the control group (three administrations), the exposure was 0.45 (11.3-fold higher than ICMA) and 10.2 (16.5-fold higher) mg. When additional ED was used in this group (9.2% of patients), it was 37.5-fold higher for tropicamide (10 drops, 1.5 mg) and 54.8-fold higher for phenylephrine (10 drops, 34 mg) than the recommended ICMA dose. Tropicamide plasma levels were not detectable at any time point in ICMA patients while it was detectable in all ED patients at 12 and 30 minutes. Phenylephrine was detectable in 14.3% of ICMA patients compared to all ED patients at least at one time point. More ED patients experienced a meaningful increase in blood pressure and/or heart rate (11.2% vs 6.0% of ICMA patients; P=0.03).Conclusion: Systemic exposure to tropicamide/phenylephrine was lower and cardiovascular (CV) effects were less frequent with ICMA. This could be of particular significance in patients at CV risk. Keywords: cataract surgery, intracameral mydriasis, topical mydriasis, systemic influence, cardiovascular safety &nbsp