METHODS: Plasma SPM were measured in samples obtained from two double-blind controlled interventions. The first, included 51 women mean age 53 ± 1.5 years, undergoing breast surgery allocated to either intravenous saline, or dexamethasone (4 mg or 8 mg) after induction of anaesthesia. The second study included 31 women of mean age 44 ± 0.5 years undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery that were allocated to either saline, or dexamethasone (4 mg). SPM (18-HEPE, 17-HDHA, RvE2, RvD1 17R-RvD1 and RvD2) were measured in plasma collected prior to induction of anaesthesia and at 24 h, and 6 weeks post-surgery. Pain was assessed using a verbal analogue scale at discharge from the post-anaesthesia recovery unit. The data from each study was combined to examine the effect of dexamethasone on plasma SPM. The relationship between pain score and SPM was examined using ordinal logistic regression.
RESULTS: The SPM 18-HEPE, 17-HDHA, RvE2, RvD1 17R-RvD1 and RvD2 were detectable in all plasma samples. There was no significant difference in any SPM due to dexamethasone over the duration of the study. There was a fall in 17-HDHA between baseline and 24 h in both the dexamethasone and saline groups (P = 0.003) but no change in the downstream SPM (RvD1, 17R-RvD1 and RvD2) or 18-HEPE and RvE2. Pain score was negatively related to levels of RvE2 measured prior to induction of anaesthesia (rho = -0.2991, P = 0.006) and positively related to BMI (rho = 0.279, P = 0.011). In ordinal logistic regression the odds ratio for RvE2 was 0.931 (CI 0.880, 0.986; P = 0.014); after adjusting for the effect of BMI indicating that an increase in RvE2 of 1 pg/ml would result in a 6.9 % fall in pain score. Allocation to a dexamethasone group did not influence the pain score or the relationship between RvE2 and pain score.
CONCLUSION: Dexamethasone administered as an anti-emetic does not affect plasma SPM levels. An elevated RvE2 level prior to surgery is predictive of a lower perceived pain score post-anaesthesia.
OBJECTIVES: To ascertain whether therapy-based rehabilitation services can influence outcome one year or more after stroke.
SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the trials registers of the following Cochrane Review Groups: Stroke Group (last searched September 2007), Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group (last searched October 2006) and Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (last searched October 2006). We also searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2006), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2006), EMBASE (1980 to October 2006), CINAHL (1982 to October 2006), AMED (1985 to October 2006), PEDro (1952 to October 2006), British Nursing Index (1993 to October 2006), DARE (1994 to October 2006), HMIC (1979 to October 2006) and NHS EED (1991 to October 2006). We also searched dissertation databases and ongoing trials and research registers, scanned reference lists and contacted researchers and experts in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials of community-based stroke patients, in which at least 75% were recruited one year after stroke and received a therapy-based rehabilitation intervention that was compared with conventional care.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials and extracted data on a number of pre-specified outcomes. The primary outcomes were the proportion of participants who had deteriorated or were dependent in personal activities of daily living at the end of scheduled follow up.
MAIN RESULTS: We identified five trials of 487 participants that were eligible for the review. Overall, there was inconclusive evidence as to whether therapy-based rehabilitation intervention one year after stroke was able to influence any relevant patient or carer outcome. Trials varied in design, type of interventions provided, quality, and outcomes assessed.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the dearth of evidence investigating long-term therapy-based rehabilitation interventions for patients with stroke.
METHODS: A single-centre retrospective study investigating the feasibility, safety and outcomes of both linear EBUS-inserted FMs and subsequent FM-guided SBRT for UC-oligometastatic disease. Motion analyses of FMs were also performed.
RESULTS: Thirty outpatients underwent 32 EBUS-FM insertion procedures with 100 % success, and no major procedural mortality or morbidity. Minor complications were 4.8 % incidence of delayed FM-displacement. UC FM-guided SBRT was completed in 20 patients with 99.9 % fractions delivered. Median SBRT dose delivered was 40 Gy over a median of 8 fractions. Majority of adverse events were Grade 1 and there was no SBRT-related mortality. Local control with SBRT was 95 %, with overall survival at 1-year and 3-years of 90 % and 56.3 % respectively. Median overall survival after SBRT was 43.6 months. FM movements in UC areas were recorded being greatest in the superior-inferior axis.
CONCLUSION: Combined linear EBUS sampling and FM-insertion in UC thoracic oligometastatic disease is feasible and safe. UC-SBRT to oligometastases using FM guidance was found to have minimal complications and associated with moderate survival up to 3 years post-treatment.
METHODS: Thirty-two healthy volunteers were randomly allocated to receive saline (Control) or dexamethasone 2 mg, 4 mg or 8 mg intravenously. Venous blood samples were collected at baseline before administration of treatment, and at 4 h, 24 h and one-week post-treatment. At each time point, measurements included blood glucose and macrophage migration inhibition factor (MMIF), full blood count including lymphocyte subsets, monocytes, neutrophils, eosinophils and basophils by flow cytometry, and plasma SPM using liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. The effect of dexamethasone dose and time on all measures was analysed using linear mixed models.
RESULTS: There was a dose-dependent increase in neutrophil count after dexamethasone that persisted for 24 h. In contrast, there was a dose-dependent reduction in counts of monocytes, lymphocytes, basophils and eosinophils 4 h after dexamethasone, followed by a rebound increase in cell counts at 24 h. Seven days after administration of dexamethasone, all cell counts were similar to baseline levels. MMIF concentration, glucose and natural killer cell counts were not significantly affected by dexamethasone. There was a significant gender effect on plasma SPM such that levels of 17-HDHA, RvD1, 17R-RvD1 and RvE2 in females were on average 14%-50% lower than males. In a linear mixed model that adjusted for neutrophil count, there was a significant interaction between the dose of dexamethasone and time, on plasma 17R-RvD1 such that plasma 17R-RvD1 fell in a dose-dependent manner until 4 h after administration of dexamethasone. There were no significant effects of dexamethasone on the other plasma SPM (18-HEPE, RvE2, 17-HDHA, RvD1, RvD2 and 14-HDHA) measured.
DISCUSSION: This is the first study in healthy volunteers to demonstrate that commonly employed antiemetic doses of dexamethasone affect immune cell populations and plasma levels of 17R-RvD1 an SPM with anti-nociceptive properties. If similar changes occur in surgical patients, then this may have implications for acute infection risk in the post-operative period.