Reconstruction microchirurgicale et prise en charge globale des patients porteurs de cancer ORL : l’importance d’une approche qualité et d’un circuit protocolisé [Microsurgical reconstruction and full management of patients with head and neck cancer: Importance of a quality approach and a circuit protocolisation]

Main of study: Management and surgical reconstruction of head and neck cancers remain a challenge. From the first consultation to surgery and radiotherapy, it is necessary to save time to ensure optimum treatment and better survival rates. Objectif: To establish a kind of quality approach to the management of patients with head and neck cancers. 54 patients who had microsurgical reconstruction after head and neck cancer were included in this study between 1997 and 2006. Results : Multiple data were considered: body mass index (BMI), ASA stage, age, existence of a pre-or postoperative radiotherapy, the surgeon's experience and the number of veins drainage. The success rate is superior when more than one draining vein is sutured to the flap for patients with a BMI > 20. Radiotherapy does not seem to affect the survival of the flap. Conclusion: According to current literature, the survival rate of these patients is better when the overall time care is less than 100 days. That period is possible with a perfect organization of the medical and paramedical team. Therefore, we propose to include these patients in a circuit protocolisation care, which saves time, to better inform patients and improve survival rates. Buts: la prise en charge et la reconstruction chirurgicale des cancers ORL restent un challenge. De la première consultation à la chirurgie et la radiothérapie, il est nécessaire de gagner du temps afin d’assurer une traitement optimum et un meilleur taux de survie. Objectif : établir une sorte d’approche qualité de la prise en charge des patients porteurs de cancers ORL. 54 patients qui ont bénéficié d’une reconstruction microchirurgicale suite à un cancer ORL ont été inclus dans cette étude entre 1997 et 2006. Résultats : plusieurs données ont été étudiées : l’index de masse corporelle (IMC), le stade ASA, l’âge, l’existence d’une radiothérapie pré ou post opératoire, l’expérience du chirurgien ainsi que le nombre de veines de drainage. Le taux de succès se révèle supérieur lorsque plus d’une veine de drainage est suturée au lambeau, pour des patients ayant un IMC > 20. La radiothérapie ne semble pas avoir de répercussion sur la survie du lambeau. Conclusion : conformément à la littérature actuelle, le taux de survie de ces patients est meilleur lorsque le temps global de prise en charge est inférieur à 100 jours. Ce délai court n’est possible qu’avec une parfaite organisation de l’équipe médicale et paramédicale. De ce fait, nous proposons d’inclure ces patients dans un circuit de prise en charge protocolisé, ce qui permet de gagner du temps, de mieux informer le patient et d’améliorer le taux de survie

Moral enhancement: do means matter morally?

One of the reasons why moral enhancement may be controversial, is because the advantages of moral enhancement may fall upon society rather than on those who are enhanced. If directed at individuals with certain counter-moral traits it may have direct societal benefits by lowering immoral behavior and increasing public safety, but it is not directly clear if this also benefits the individual in question. In this paper, we will discuss what we consider to be moral enhancement, how different means may be used to achieve it and whether the means we employ to reach moral enhancement matter morally. Are certain means to achieve moral enhancement wrong in themselves? Are certain means to achieve moral enhancement better than others, and if so, why? More specifically, we will investigate whether the difference between direct and indirect moral enhancement matters morally. Is it the case that indirect means are morally preferable to direct means of moral enhancement and can we indeed pinpoint relevant intrinsic, moral differences between both? We argue that the distinction between direct and indirect means is indeed morally relevant, but only insofar as it tracks an underlying distinction between active and passive interventions. Although passive interventions can be ethical provided specific safeguards are put in place, these interventions exhibit a greater potential to compromise autonomy and disrupt identity