[Role of coronary artery bypass grafting in the treatment of coronary artery disease - a well-balanced information of the patients and objective decision making are welcome]

Most recently discussion about the optimal treatment for different subsets of patients suffering from coronary artery disease has re-emerged, mainly because of the uncertainty caused by doctors and patients regarding the phenomenon of unpredictable early and late stent thrombosis. Surgical revascularization using multiple arterial bypass grafts has repeatedly proven its superiority compared to percutaneous intervention techniques, especially in patients suffering from left main stem disease and coronary 3-vessels disease. Several prospective randomized multicenter studies comparing early and mid-term results following PCI and CABG have been really restrictive, with respect to patient enrollment, with less than 5% of all patients treated during the same time period been enrolled. Coronary artery bypass grafting allows the most complete revascularization in one session, because all target coronary vessels larger than 1 mm can be bypassed in their distal segments. Once the patient has been turn-off for surgery, surgeons have to consider the most complete arterial revascularization in order to decrease the long-term necessity for re-revascularization; for instance patency rate of the left internal thoracic artery grafted to the distal part left anterior descending artery may be as high as 90-95% after 10 to 15 years. Early mortality following isolated CABG operation has been as low as 0.6 to 1% in the most recent period (reports from the University Hospital Berne and the University Hospital of Zurich); beside these excellent results, the CABG option seems to be less expensive than PCI with time, since the necessity for additional PCI is rather high following initial PCI, and the price of stent devices is still very high, particularly in Switzerland. Patients, insurance and experts in health care should be better and more honestly informed concerning the risk and costs of PCI and CABG procedures as well as about the much higher rate of subsequent interventions following PCI. Team approach for all patients in whom both options could be offered seems mandatory to avoid unbalanced information of the patients. Looking at the recent developments in transcatheter valve treatments, the revival of cardiological-cardiosurgical conferences seems to a good option to optimize the cooperation between the two medical specialties: cardiology and cardiac surgery.

The SAKK cancer-specific geriatric assessment (C-SGA): a pilot study of a brief tool for clinical decision-making in older cancer patients

BACKGROUND Recommendations from international task forces on geriatric assessment emphasize the need for research including validation of cancer-specific geriatric assessment (C-SGA) tools in oncological settings. The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of the SAKK Cancer-Specific Geriatric Assessment (C-SGA) in clinical practice. METHODS A cross sectional study of cancer patients >=65 years old (N = 51) with pathologically confirmed cancer presenting for initiation of chemotherapy treatment (07/01/2009-03/31/2011) at two oncology departments in Swiss canton hospitals: Kantonsspital Graubunden (KSGR N = 25), Kantonsspital St. Gallen (KSSG N = 26). Data was collected using three instruments, the SAKK C-SGA plus physician and patient evaluation forms. The SAKK C-SGA includes six measures covering five geriatric assessment domains (comorbidity, function, psychosocial, nutrition, cognition) using a mix of medical record abstraction (MRA) and patient interview. Five individual domains and one overall SAKK C-SGA score were calculated and dichotomized as below/above literature-based cut-offs. The SAKK C-SGA was evaluated by: patient and physician estimated time to complete, ease of completing, and difficult or unanswered questions. RESULTS Time to complete the patient questionnaire was considered acceptable by almost all (>=96%) patients and physicians. Patients reported slightly shorter times to complete the questionnaire than physicians (17.33 +/- 7.34 vs. 20.59 +/- 6.53 minutes, p = 0.02). Both groups rated the patient questionnaire as easy/fairly easy to complete (91% vs. 84% respectively, p = 0.14) with few difficult or unanswered questions. The MRA took on average 8.32 +/- 4.72 minutes to complete. Physicians (100%) considered time to complete MRA acceptable, 96% rated it as easy/fairly easy to complete. Individual study site populations differed on health-related characteristics (excellent/good physician-rated general health KSGR 71% vs. KSSG 32%, p = 0.007). The overall mean C-SGA score was 2.4 +/- 1.12. Patients at KSGR had lower C-SGA scores (2.00 +/- 1.19 vs. 2.81 +/- 0.90, p = 0.009) and a smaller proportion (28% vs.65%, p = 0.008) was above the C-SGA cut-off score compared to KSSG. CONCLUSIONS These results suggest the SAKK C-SGA is a feasible practical tool for use in clinical practice. It demonstrated discriminative ability based on objective geriatric assessment measures, but additional investigations on use for clinical decision-making are warranted. The SAKK C-SGA also provides important usable domain information for intervention to optimize outcomes in older cancer patients.

Virtual implant planning in the edentulous maxilla: criteria for decision making of prosthesis design

OBJECTIVES To evaluate prosthetic parameters in the edentulous anterior maxilla for decision making between fixed and removable implant prosthesis using virtual planning software. MATERIAL AND METHODS CT- or DVT-scans of 43 patients (mean age 62 ± 8 years) with an edentulous maxilla were analyzed with the NobelGuide software. Implants (≥3.5 mm diameter, ≥10 mm length) were virtually placed in the optimal three-dimensional prosthetic position of all maxillary front teeth. Anatomical and prosthetic landmarks, including the cervical crown point (C-Point), the acrylic flange border (F-Point), and the implant-platform buccal-end (I-Point) were defined in each middle section to determine four measuring parameters: (1) acrylic flange height (FLHeight), (2) mucosal coverage (MucCov), (3) crown-Implant distance (CID) and (4) buccal prosthesis profile (ProsthProfile). Based on these parameters, all patients were assigned to one of three classes: (A) MucCov ≤ 0 mm and ProsthProfile≥45(0) allowing for fixed prosthesis, (B) MucCov = 0-5 mm and/or ProsthProfile = 30(0) -45(0) probably allowing for fixed prosthesis, and (C) MucCov ≥ 5 mm and/or ProsthProfile ≤ 30(0) where removable prosthesis is favorable. Statistical analyses included descriptive methods and non-parametric tests. RESULTS Mean values were for FLHeight 10.0 mm, MucCov 5.6 mm, CID 7.4 mm, and ProsthProfile 39.1(0) . Seventy percent of patients fulfilled class C criteria (removable), 21% class B (probably fixed), and 2% class A (fixed), while in 7% (three patients) bone volume was insufficient for implant planning. CONCLUSIONS The proposed classification and virtual planning procedure simplify the decision-making process regarding type of prosthesis and increase predictability of esthetic treatment outcomes. It was demonstrated that in the majority of cases, the space between the prosthetic crown and implant platform had to be filled with prosthetic materials.