Biomedical subjects

Andrea L Cheville

Publications and source records attributed to Andrea L Cheville.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

Cancer rehabilitation.

Cancer-related functional impairments and the associated economic burden are likely to increase in coming decades. A variety of factors contribute to the current availability of comprehensive rehabilitation services in only a few cancer centers. In general, cancer patients are highly distressed by the loss of independent mobility and self-care. The majority of patients are amenable to receiving rehabilitation services. Reports describing the integration of rehabilitation specialists into the delivery of cancer care strongly suggest that patients independence can be optimized through established techniques. The provision of humane and effective rehabilitation requires the formulation of dynamic and clinically appropriate goals. Many goals are common to most malignancies, eg, reducing the functional impact of aerobic deconditioning and chemotherapeutic neuropathy. Others are highly disease-specific, such as scapular stabilization following cranial nerve IX sacrifice. The expectations of patients and clinicians must evolve in response to the progression of disease. Restorative, supportive, preventative, and palliative goals should be re-evaluated at critical points along the disease course. A rubric for the development and implementation of rehabilitation goals at different cancer stages is described and illustrated with examples from breast and head and neck cancers.

Adaptation, Psychological↗

PubMed2005

SVC syndrome with a patent SVC: treatment of internal jugular venous occlusion after surgical and radiation therapy of esophageal cancer.

A patient is described in whom recanalization and stent placement in an occluded internal jugular vein was performed for the treatment of refractory facial edema initially thought to be lymphedema. The authors describe the combination of venous obstructions leading to this clinical presentation, which they term "SVC syndrome with a patent SVC."

Anticoagulants↗

PubMed2003

Lymphedema management.

Lymphedema, defined as the abnormal accumulation of protein rich fluid dysfunction of the lymphatic system, is a common sequela of cancer therapy. The incidence is highest among patients who have undergone resection and irradiation of a lymph node bed. Recently, increased attention has been focused on the modification of anticancer therapies in an effort to minimize lymphatic compromise. Sentinel lymph node biopsy is an example of a surgical procedure developed to preserve lymphatic function. Concurrent with the development of less invasive treatments, the field of lymphedema management has evolved rapidly over the past decade. Combined manual therapy, often referred to as complex decongestive physiotherapy (CDP), has emerged as the standard of care. CDP combines compression bandaging, manual lymphatic drainage (a specialized massage technique), exercise, and skin care with extensive patient education. Case series collectively describing a mean 65% volume reduction in over 10,000 patients attest its efficacy. Pneumatic compression pumps were historically widely used to control lymphedema. Their use as an isolated treatment modality is now rare. Reliance on pumps diminished with the recognition that they may exacerbate truncal and genital lymphedema, as well as injure peripheral lymphatics when applied at high pressures. Many noncompressive approaches, particularly the use of benzopyrone medications and liposuction, continue to be used abroad.

Bandages↗

PubMed2003

The grading of lymphedema in oncology clinical trials.

Lymphedema is a common late toxicity of cancer therapy. This article describes the rationale and process utilized by the Lymphedema Working Group for the revision and expansion of the Common Toxicity Criteria version 2 (CTC v2.0) lymphedema criteria to produce the CTC v3.0 lymphedema criteria. Established clinician-based rating scales and quantitative instruments are reviewed in this article. None of the extant rating scales have been formally validated, nor has their reliability been assessed. Drawbacks of current scales were considered in formulating CTC v3.0 criteria. Most rely exclusively on volume to diagnose and grade lymphedema. This imposes significant clinical limitations, particularly in the assessment of toxicity in oncology clinical trials. Volume-based rating scales are of little value in rating the severity of bilateral limb and nonlimb edema. Problems with nonvolumetric staging systems (eg, CTC v2.0) include insufficient detail to permit useful discrimination of severity among the majority of lymphedema patients. Technologies for objectively quantifying lymphedema have been developed and validated. Although these are briefly reviewed, it is recognized that cost and access issues limit their widespread clinical utility and, as such, were not considered in developing the CTC v3.0 criteria. The CTC v3.0 lymphedema criteria adopted several innovations. Principle among these was the decision to generate separate criteria for volumetric increase, dermal changes, and subcutaneous fibrosis. We anticipate the use of the new CTC v3.0 lymphedema criteria to begin in mid-2003 for grading the key clinical features of this disorder in oncology clinical trials. The purpose of this article is to familiarize the reader with (1) background on the clinical features of lymphedema, (2) information on established lymphedema rating systems, (3) the consensus process and rationale of the Lymphedema Working Group, (4) the new CTC v3.0, and (5) quantitative techniques for assessment of lymphedema.

Academies and Institutes↗