The knowledge, concerns and healthcare practices among physicians regarding electronic cigarettes

Background: Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are battery-powered devices that deliver aerosolized nicotine. With easy access and over-the-counter availability, many patients consider using electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation. Few studies have looked at long-term safety/efficacy and physician knowledge/attitudes toward e-cigarettes. Physicians have insufficient guidelines for advising their patients about e-cigarettes. Objective: 1) To identify knowledge and attitude of health care practitioners toward electronic cigarettes. 2) To identify the effect of level of training, experience and speciality on knowledge and practice of electronic cigarettes. 3) To identify factors influencing electronic cigarettes advise/prescribing practice. Methods: An anonymous online questionnaire was sent to residents, fellows, and faculty in pre-selected specialties at Saint Louis University (SLU) Hospital. Results: We received 115 responses. Nine percent reported being ‘very familiar’ with e-cigarettes, while 25% reported no familiarity; 18% of physicians would advise e-cigarettes as nicotine-replacement therapy if asked by patients; 91% were aware of the nicotine content of e-cigarettes, but only 20% and 39%, respectively, were aware of the presence of carcinogens and polyethylene glycol. Only 63% of respondents knew what ‘vape’ meant. Lack of evidence regarding long-term safety (76%), e-cigarettes as starter products for nonsmokers (50%), absence of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations (51%) and marketing to youth (42%) were major concerns. Stricter regulations (54%), warning labels similar to tobacco products (53%), restricting advertising (36%), banning sales to minors (34%), and banning use in public spaces (25%) were favored as regulatory measures. More than 50% of physicians see a role for e-cigarettes as part of ‘harm-reduction strategy’. Conclusions: Further research is needed to assess whether e- cigarettes could be an effective smoking-cessation tool. There is an apparent knowledge deficit among physicians and an urgent need for evidence-based guidelines to aid with advising patients enquiring about e-cigarettes

Skeletal Metastasis as Detected by 18F-FDG PET with Negative CT of the PET/CT: Frequency and Impact on Cancer Staging and/or Management

Objectives: The aim of our study is to assess the frequency of detection of PET positive CT negative skeletal metastases (SM) and determine the impact of such detection on staging and/or management in patients who had FDG PET/CT as part of the cancer work up.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 2000 18F-FDG PET/CT scans of known cancer patients. A log was kept to record cases of suspected SM with or without bone changes from the low-dose non-contrast CT. The presence or absence of SM was evaluated based on available pathological and clinical data. The impact of detection of such lesions on cancer staging and/or management was evaluated by a board certified oncologist.Results: Of the 2000 cases, 18F-FDG PET/CT suggested SM in 146/2000 (7.3%). Of those 146 cases, 105 (72%) were positive on both PET and CT. The remaining 41 (28%) had PET positive CT negative bone lesions. SM was confirmed in 36/41 (88%) PET positive/CT negative cases. This was based on biopsy, imaging or clinical follow-up. The detection of PET positive CT negative SM did not change staging or management in 7/36 (19.4%). However, staging and/or management was affected in 29/36 (80.6%). Conclusions: SM is not uncommon in 18F-FDG PET/CT, as it accounts for 146/2000 (7.3%) of cases. PET demonstrated FDG-avid SM without a CT abnormality in at least 36/146 (25%). Patients staging and or management changed in 29/36 (80.5%). We concluded that 18F-FDG PET is sensitive in detection of SM with significant impact on staging & or management. Key words18F-FDG PET/CT, Skeletal metastasis, PET positive, CT negativ