METHODS: Non-inferiority randomized, clinical trial involving patients presenting with acute respiratory failure conducted in the ED of a local hospital. Participants were randomly allocated to receive either hCPAP or fCPAP as per the trial protocol. The primary endpoint was respiratory rate reduction. Secondary endpoints included discomfort, improvement in Dyspnea and Likert scales, heart rate reduction, arterial blood oxygenation, partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2), dryness of mucosa and intubation rate.
RESULTS: 224 patients were included and randomized (113 patients to hCPAP, 111 to fCPAP). Both techniques reduced respiratory rate (hCPAP: from 33.56 ± 3.07 to 25.43 ± 3.11 bpm and fCPAP: from 33.46 ± 3.35 to 27.01 ± 3.19 bpm), heart rate (hCPAP: from 114.76 ± 15.5 to 96.17 ± 16.50 bpm and fCPAP: from 115.07 ± 14.13 to 101.19 ± 16.92 bpm), and improved dyspnea measured by both the Visual Analogue Scale (hCPAP: from 16.36 ± 12.13 to 83.72 ± 12.91 and fCPAP: from 16.01 ± 11.76 to 76.62 ± 13.91) and the Likert scale. Both CPAP techniques improved arterial oxygenation (PaO2 from 67.72 ± 8.06 mmHg to 166.38 ± 30.17 mmHg in hCPAP and 68.99 ± 7.68 mmHg to 184.49 ± 36.38 mmHg in fCPAP) and the PaO2:FiO2 (Partial pressure of arterial oxygen: Fraction of inspired oxygen) ratio from 113.6 ± 13.4 to 273.4 ± 49.5 in hCPAP and 115.0 ± 12.9 to 307.7 ± 60.9 in fCPAP. The intubation rate was lower with hCPAP (4.4% for hCPAP versus 18% for fCPAP, absolute difference -13.6%, p = 0.003). Discomfort and dryness of mucosa were also lower with hCPAP.
CONCLUSION: In patients presenting to the ED with acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema or decompensated COPD, hCPAP was non-inferior to fCPAP and resulted in greater comfort levels and lower intubation rate.
Materials and Methods: Forty eight hips with the conversion of bipolar HA to THA were followed up for an average 6.2 years (range 2.0-11.5 years). Twenty one hips had conversion surgery to THA using metal-on-metal articulation (28 or 32 mm head). Nine hips used ceramic-on-ceramic (28-40 mm) and eighteen hips used large head metal-on-metal bearing (>40 mm). Outcome was evaluated using Harris Hip Score (HHS) and Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score. The radiographs were analyzed for evidence of osteolysis and/or loosening. The complications were evaluated, especially dislocation with different femoral head diameter.
Results: Average HHS significantly improved from 42 preoperatively to 86 postoperatively and the average WOMAC score also significantly improved from 47 to 22 postoperatively. Radiological evaluation showed all the femoral components were stable. There was one acetabular component loosening, which required revision 9 years after conversion to THA. One dislocation and one recurrent dislocation were recorded in isolated acetabular revision hip; whereas one dislocation, one recurrent dislocation, and one trochanteric nonunion occurred in the hips with revision of both components. All dislocations occurred in hips with a femoral head size of 28 mm (P = 0.052). The cup and femoral head interval length was the most significant factor contributing to dislocation (P = 0.013).
Conclusions: Conversion THA after failed bipolar HA offers a reliable pain relief and functional improvement. To prevent dislocation, it is highly recommended to use a larger diameter femoral head, especially where the cup size is big.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: miR-205 expression was investigated in 48 cases of inflammatory, benign and malignant tumor tissue array of the neck, oronasopharynx, larynx and salivary glands by Locked Nucleic Acid in situ hybridization (LNA-ISH) technology.
RESULTS: miR-205 expression was significantly differentially expressed across all of the inflammatory, benign and malignant tumor tissues of the neck. A significant increase in miR-205 staining intensity (p<0.05) was observed from inflammation to benign and malignant tumors in head and neck tissue array, suggesting that miR-205 could be a biomarker to differentiate between cancer and non-cancer tissues.
CONCLUSIONS: LNA-ISH revealed that miR-205 exhibited significant differential cytoplasmic and nuclear staining among inflammation, benign and malignant tumors of head and neck. miR-205 was not only exclusively expressed in squamous epithelial malignancy. This study offers information and a basis for a comprehensive study of the role of miR-205 that may be useful as a biomarker and/or therapeutic target in head and neck tumors.
METHODS: Blood from 30 patients with primary OSCC and 1:1 age-sex-matched controls was subjected to qPCR and ELISA to detect VEGF-A gene expression and serum level. Tumors of the 30 patients were investigated for VEGF Receptor-2 (VEGFR-2) expression and were analyzed using Image J software version 1.52 for DAB percentage (DAB-P) area and optical density (OD).
RESULTS: VEGF-A relative gene expression among patients was 2.43-fold higher compared to the healthy control group. Well-differentiated had a 1.98-fold increment, while poorly differentiated had a 3.58-fold increment. Serum VEGF-A was significantly elevated among the patients compared to controls (458.7 vs 253.2, p=0.0225). Poorly differentiated had a higher serum VEGF concentration (1262.0±354.7pg/ml) compared with other two. Mean VEGFR-2 DAB-P level in OSCC was 42.41±5.61(p=0.15). Well-differentiated had a DAB-P of 41.20±5.32 while poorly differentiated had DAB-P 46.21±3.78. The mean OD in OSCC was 0.54±0.16. VEGFR-2 OD in well and poorly differentiated OSCC were 0.48±0.12 and 0.68±0.17, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: VEGF-A gene expression, serum levels, and tissue VEGFR-2 levels correlated linearly with the stage and grade of the tumor. This study justifies the value of VEGF-A as a potential biomarker in OSCC in early detection of OSCC. More studies are needed to accept the use of VEGF-A.
METHODS: Head and neck cancer patients were recruited from July 2016 till March 2017 at National Cancer Institute, Ministry of Health, Malaysia. All study participants continued their standard oncology surveillance. Treatment group participants additionally received Chinese herbal treatment. The assessments included unstimulated salivary flow rate (USFR), stimulated salivary flow rate (SSFR), and QoL questionnaire.
RESULTS: Of 42 recruited participants, 28 were in the treatment group and 14 were in the control group. Participants were mainly Chinese (71.4%), stage III cancer (40.5%), and had nasopharynx cancer (76.2%). The commonly used single herbs were Wu Mei, San Qi, and Tian Hua Fen. Sha Shen Mai Dong Tang, Liu Wei Di Huang Wan, and Gan Lu Yin were the frequently prescribed herbal formulas. The baseline characteristics, USFR, SSFR, and QoL between control and treatment groups were comparable (p > 0.05). USFR between control and treatment groups were similar throughout the 6-month study period. SSFR for the treatment group significantly improved from 0.15 ± 0.28 ml/min (baseline) to 0.32 ± 0.22 ml/min (p = 0.04; at the 3rd month) and subsequently achieved 0.46 ± 0.23 ml/min (p = 0.001; at the 6th month). The treatment group had better QoL in terms of speech (p = 0.005), eating (p = 0.02), and head and neck pain (p = 0.04) at the 6th month.
CONCLUSION: Herbal treatment may improve xerostomia and QoL in post-radiotherapy head and cancer patients.
Objectives: This study aimed to determine post-treatment oral cancer patients' concerns and its relationship with patients' clinical characteristics, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), psychological distress and patient satisfaction with the follow-up consultation.
Methods: A total of 85 oral cancer patients were recruited from a three-armed pragmatic RCT study on the patient concerns inventory for head and neck cancer (PCI-H&N), which was conducted at six hospital-based oral maxillofacial specialist clinics throughout Malaysia. Malaysians aged 18 years and above and on follow-ups from 1 month to 5 years or more were eligible. Patients completed the PCI-H&N, functional assessment of cancer therapy -H&N v4.0 and Distress Thermometer at pre-consultation and satisfaction questionnaire at post-consultation. The data were analysed descriptively; multiple linear regression and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to determine possible predictors of patients' HRQoL and psychological distress.
Results: 'Recurrence or fear of cancer coming back' (31.8%) was most frequently selected. 43.5% of patients selected ≥4 concerns. A significantly high number of concerns were associated with patients of '1-month to 1-year post-treatment' (n = 84%; p = 0.001). A significant association existed between 'time after treatment completed' and patients' concerns of 'chewing/eating', 'mouth opening', 'swelling', 'weight', 'ability to perform', 'cancer treatment' and 'supplement/diet-related'. 'Chewing/eating' was predicted for low HRQoL (p < 0.0001) followed by 'appearance' and 'ability to perform recreation activities' (personal functions domain). Patients with high psychological distress levels were 14 times more likely to select 'ability to perform recreation activities' and seven times more likely to select 'feeling depressed'. No significant association was identified between patients' concerns and patients' satisfaction with the consultation.
Conclusion: Routine follow-up consultations should incorporate the PCI-H&N prompt list to enhance patient-centred care approach as the type and number of patients' concerns are shown to reflect their HRQoL and psychological distress.TRIAL REGISTRATION: NMRR-18-3624-45010 (IIR).
METHODS: Two 3D printed models were designed and fabricated using actual patient imaging data with reference marker points embedded artificially within these models that were then registered to a surgical navigation system using 3 different methods. The first method uses a conventional manual registration, using the actual patient's imaging data. The second method is done by directly scanning the created model using intraoperative computed tomography followed by registering the model to a new imaging dataset manually. The third is similar to the second method of scanning the model but eventually uses an automatic registration technique. The errors for each experiment were then calculated based on the distance of the surgical navigation probe from the respective positions of the embedded marker points.
RESULTS: Errors were found in the preparation and printing techniques, largely depending on the orientation of the printed segment and postprocessing, but these were relatively small. Larger errors were noted based on a couple of variables: if the models were registered using the original patient imaging data as opposed to using the imaging data from directly scanning the model (1.28 mm vs. 1.082 mm), and the accuracy was best using the automated registration techniques (0.74 mm).
CONCLUSION: Spatial accuracy errors occur consistently in every 3D fabricated model. These errors are derived from the fabrication process, the image registration process, and the surgical process of registration.