Criteria for evaluation of disease extent by 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine scans in neuroblastoma: a report for the International Neuroblastoma Risk Group (INRG) Task Force

BackgroundNeuroblastoma is an embryonic tumour of the sympathetic nervous system, metastatic in half of the patients at diagnosis, with a high preponderance of osteomedullary disease, making accurate evaluation of metastatic sites and response to therapy challenging. Metaiodobenzylguanidine (mIBG), taken into cells via the norepinephrine transporter, provides a sensitive and specific method of assessing tumour in both soft tissue and bone sites. The goal of this report was to develop consensus guidelines for the use of mIBG scans in staging, response assessment and surveillance in neuroblastoma.MethodsThe International Neuroblastoma Risk Group (INRG) Task Force, including a multidisciplinary group in paediatric oncology of North and South America, Europe, Oceania and Asia, formed a subcommittee on metastatic disease evaluation, including expert nuclear medicine physicians and oncologists, who developed these guidelines based on their experience and the medical literature, with approval by the larger INRG Task Force.ResultsGuidelines for patient preparation, radiotracer administration, techniques of scanning including timing, energy, specific views, and use of single photon emission computed tomography are included. Optimal timing of scans in relation to therapy and for surveillance is reviewed. Validated semi-quantitative scoring methods in current use are reviewed, with recommendations for use in prognosis and response evaluation.ConclusionsMetaiodobenzylguanidine scans are the most sensitive and specific method of staging and response evaluation in neuroblastoma, particularly when used with a semi-quantitative scoring method. Use of the optimal techniques for mIBG in staging and response, including a semi-quantitative score, is essential for evaluation of the efficacy of new therapy

Early In-Hospital Mortality following Trainee Doctors' First Day at Work

BACKGROUND:There is a commonly held assumption that early August is an unsafe period to be admitted to hospital in England, as newly qualified doctors start work in NHS hospitals on the first Wednesday of August. We investigate whether in-hospital mortality is higher in the week following the first Wednesday in August than in the previous week. METHODOLOGY:A retrospective study in England using administrative hospital admissions data. Two retrospective cohorts of all emergency patients admitted on the last Wednesday in July and the first Wednesday in August for 2000 to 2008, each followed up for one week. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:The odds of death for patients admitted on the first Wednesday in August was 6% higher (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.15, p=0.05) after controlling for year, gender, age, socio-economic deprivation and co-morbidity. When subdivided into medical, surgical and neoplasm admissions, medical admissions admitted on the first Wednesday in August had an 8% (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.16, p=0.03) higher odds of death. In 2007 and 2008, when the system for junior doctors' job applications changed, patients admitted on Wednesday August 1(st) had 8% higher adjusted odds of death than those admitted the previous Wednesday, but this was not statistically significant (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.23, p=0.24). CONCLUSIONS:We found evidence that patients admitted on the first Wednesday in August have a higher early death rate in English hospitals compared with patients admitted on the previous Wednesday. This was higher for patients admitted with a medical primary diagnosis

A July Spike in Fatal Medication Errors: A Possible Effect of New Medical Residents

residencies and acquire increased responsibility for patient care. Many have suggested that these new medical residents may produce errors and worsen patient outcomes—the so-called “July Effect; ” however, we have found no U.S. evidence documenting this effect. OBJECTIVE: Determine whether fatal medication errors spike in July

Non-invasive imaging in the diagnosis of acute viral myocarditis

Autopsy series of consecutive cases have demonstrated an incidence of myocarditis at approximately 1–10%; on the contrary, myocarditis is seriously underdiagnosed clinically. In a traditional view, the gold standard has been myocardial biopsy. However, it is generally specific but invasive and less sensitive, mostly because of the focal nature of the disease. Thus, non-invasive approaches to detect myocarditis are necessary. The traditional diagnostic tools are electrocardiography, laboratory values, especially troponin T or I, creatine kinase and echocardiography. For a long period, nuclear technique with indium-111 antimyosin antibody has been used as a diagnostic approach. In the last years, the use of this technique has declined because of radiation exposure and 48-h delay in obtaining imaging after injection to prevent blood pool effect. Thus, a non-invasive diagnostic approach without radiation and online image availability has been awaited. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging has these promising characteristics. With this technique, it is possible to analyse inflammation, oedema and necrosis in addition to functional parameters such as left ventricular function, regional wall motion and dimensions. Thus, cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging has emerged as the most important imaging tool in the diagnostic procedure and the review focus on this field. But there are also advances in echocardiography and computer tomography, which are described in detail