New Clinical Indications for (18)F/(11)C-choline, New Tracers for Positron Emission Tomography and a Promising Hybrid Device for Prostate Cancer Staging: A Systematic Review of the Literature

CONTEXT Radiolabelled choline positron emission tomography has changed the management of prostate cancer patients. However, new emerging radiopharmaceutical agents, like radiolabelled prostate specific membrane antigen, and new promising hybrid imaging will begin new challenges in the diagnostic field. OBJECTIVE The continuous evolution in nuclear medicine has led to the improvement in the detection of recurrent prostate cancer (PCa), particularly distant metastases. New horizons have been opened for radiolabelled choline positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) as a guide for salvage therapy or for the assessment of systemic therapies. In addition, new tracers and imaging tools have been recently tested, providing important information for the management of PCa patients. Herein we discuss: (1) the available evidence in literature on radiolabelled choline PET and their recent indications, (2) the role of alternative radiopharmaceutical agents, and (3) the advantages of a recent hybrid imaging device (PET/magnetic resonance imaging) in PCa. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION Data from recently published (2010-2015), original articles concerning the role of choline PET/CT, new emerging radiotracers, and a new imaging device are analysed. This review is reported according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS In the restaging phase, the detection rate of choline PET varies between 4% and 97%, mainly depending on the site of recurrence and prostate-specific antigen levels. Both 68gallium (68Ga)-prostate specific membrane antigen and 18F-fluciclovine are shown to be more accurate in the detection of recurrent disease as compared with radiolabelled choline PET/CT. Particularly, Ga68-PSMA has a detection rate of 50% and 68%, respectively for prostate-specific antigen levels < 0.5ng/ml and 0.5-2ng/ml. Moreover, 68Ga- PSMA PET/magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated a particularly higher accuracy in detecting PCa than PET/CT. New tracers, such as radiolabelled bombesin or urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor, are promising, but few data in clinical practice are available today. CONCLUSIONS Some limitations emerge from the published papers, both for radiolabelled choline PET/CT and also for new radiopharmaceutical agents. Efforts are still needed to enhance the impact of published data in the world of oncology, in particular when new radiopharmaceuticals are introduced into the clinical arena. PATIENT SUMMARY In the present review, the authors summarise the last evidences in clinical practice for the assessment of prostate cancer, by using nuclear medicine modalities, like positron emission tomography/computed tomography and positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging.

Superior outcomes of decompression with an interlaminar dynamic device versus decompression alone in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and back pain: a cross registry study.

INTRODUCTION Surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) has been associated with poorer outcomes in patients with pronounced low back pain (LBP) as compared to patients with predominant leg pain. This cross registry study assessed potential benefits of the interlaminar coflex® device as an add-on to bony decompression alone. METHODS Patients with lumbar decompression plus coflex® (SWISSspine registry) were compared with decompressed controls (Spine Tango registry). Inclusion criteria were LSS and a preoperative back pain level of ≥5 points. 1:1 propensity score-based matching was performed. Outcome measures were back and leg pain relief, COMI score improvement, patient satisfaction, complication, and revision rates. RESULTS 50 matched pairs without residual significant differences but age were created. At the 7-9 months follow-up interval the coflex® group had higher back (p=0.014) and leg pain relief (p<0.001) and COMI score improvement (p=0.029) than the decompression group. Patient satisfaction was 90% in both groups. No revision was documented in the coflex® and one in the decompression group (2.0%). DISCUSSION In the short-term, lumbar decompression with coflex® compared with decompression alone in patients with LSS and pronounced LBP at baseline is a safe and effective treatment option that appears beneficial regarding clinical and functional outcomes. However, residual confounding of non-measured covariables may have partially influenced our findings. Also, despite careful inclusion and exclusion of cases the cross registry approach introduces a potential for selection bias that we could not totally control for and that makes additional studies necessary.

Long-term Outcome After Monosegmental L4/5 Stabilization for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis With the Dynesys Device.

STUDY DESIGN Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected clinical data. OBJECTIVE To assess the long-term outcome of patients with monosegmental L4/5 degenerative spondylolisthesis treated with the dynamic Dynesys device. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA The Dynesys system has been used as a semirigid, lumbar dorsal pedicular stabilization device since 1994. Good short-term results have been reported, but little is known about the long-term outcome after treatment for degenerative spondylolisthesis at the L4/5 level. METHODS A total of 39 consecutive patients with symptomatic degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis at the L4/5 level were treated with bilateral decompression and Dynesys instrumentation. At a mean follow-up of 7.2 years (range, 5.0-11.2 y), they underwent clinical and radiographic evaluation and quality of life assessment. RESULTS At final follow-up, back pain improved in 89% and leg pain improved in 86% of patients compared with preoperative status. Eighty-three percent of patients reported global subjective improvement. Ninety-two percent would undergo the surgery again. Eight patients (21%) required further surgery because of symptomatic adjacent segment disease (6 cases), late-onset infection (1 case), and screw breakage (1 case). In 9 cases, radiologic progression of spondylolisthesis at the operated segment was found. Seventy-four percent of operated segments showed limited flexion-extension range of <4 degrees. Adjacent segment pathology, although without clinical correlation, was diagnosed at the L5/S1 (17.9%) and L3/4 (28.2%) segments. In 4 cases, asymptomatic screw loosening was observed. CONCLUSIONS Monosegmental Dynesys instrumentation of degenerative spondylolisthesis at L4/5 shows good long-term results. The rate of secondary surgeries is comparable to other dorsal instrumentation devices. Residual range of motion in the stabilized segment is reduced, and the rate of radiologic and symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration is low. Patient satisfaction is high. Dynesys stabilization of symptomatic L4/5 degenerative spondylolisthesis is a possible alternative to other stabilization devices.

Barriers and facilitators to nurses' acceptance of and implications for injury rates of an IV catheter safety device

This study has the purpose of determining the barriers and facilitators to nurses' acceptance of the Johnson and Johnson Protectiv®* Plus IV catheter safety needle device and implications for needlestick injuries at St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, Texas. A one-time cross-sectional survey of 620 responding nurses was conducted by this researcher during December, 2000. The study objectives were to: (1) describe the perceived (a) organizational and individual barriers and facilitators and (b) acceptance of implementation of the IV catheter device; (2) examine the relative importance of these predictors; (3) describe (a) perceived changes in needlestick injuries after implementation of the device; (b) the reported incidence of injuries; and (c) the extent of underreporting by nurses; and (4) examine the relative importance of (a) the preceding predictors and (b) acceptance of the device in predicting perceived changes in needlestick injuries. Safety climate and training were evaluated as organizational factors. Individual factors evaluated were experience with the device, including time using it and frequency of use, and background information, including nursing unit, and length of time as a nurse in this hospital and in total nursing career. The conceptual framework was based upon the safety climate model. Descriptive statistics and multiple and logistic regression were utilized to address the study objectives. ^ The findings showed widespread acceptance of the device and a strong perception that it reduced the number of needlesticks. Acceptance was notably predicted by adequate training, appropriate time between training and device use, solid safety climate, and short length of service, in that order. A barrier to acceptance was nurses' longtime of use of previous needle technologies. Over four-fifths of nurses were compliant in always using the device. Compliance had two facilitators: length of time using device and, to a lesser extent, safety climate. Rates of compliance tended to be lower among nurses in units in which the device was frequently used. ^ High quality training and an atmosphere of caring about nurse safety stand out as primary facilitators that other institutions would need to adopt in order to achieve maximum success in implementing safety programs involving utilization of new safety devices. ^

Effects of congressional modernization laws on public access to innovative medical device technologies

The Federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) play key roles in making Class III, medical devices available to the public, and they are required by law to meet statutory deadlines for applications under review. Historically, both agencies have failed to meet their respective statutory requirements. Since these failures affect patient access and may adversely impact public health, Congress has enacted several “modernization” laws. However, the effectiveness of these modernization laws has not been adequately studied or established for Class III medical devices. ^ The aim of this research study was, therefore, to analyze how these modernization laws may have affected public access to medical devices. Two questions were addressed: (1) How have the FDA modernization laws affected the time to approval for medical device premarket approval applications (PMAs)? (2) How has the CMS modernization law affected the time to approval for national coverage decisions (NCDs)? The data for this research study were collected from publicly available databases for the period January 1, 1995, through December 31, 2008. These dates were selected to ensure that a sufficient period of time was captured to measure pre- and post-modernization effects on time to approval. All records containing original PMAs were obtained from the FDA database, and all records containing NCDs were obtained from the CMS database. Source documents, including FDA premarket approval letters and CMS national coverage decision memoranda, were reviewed to obtain additional data not found in the search results. Analyses were conducted to determine the effects of the pre- and post-modernization laws on time to approval. Secondary analyses of FDA subcategories were conducted to uncover any causal factors that might explain differences in time to approval and to compare with the primary trends. The primary analysis showed that the FDA modernization laws of 1997 and 2002 initially reduced PMA time to approval; after the 2002 modernization law, the time to approval began increasing and continued to increase through December 2008. The non-combined, subcategory approval trends were similar to the primary analysis trends. The combined, subcategory analysis showed no clear trends with the exception of non-implantable devices, for which time to approval trended down after 1997. The CMS modernization law of 2003 reduced NCD time to approval, a trend that continued through December 2008. This study also showed that approximately 86% of PMA devices do not receive NCDs. ^ As a result of this research study, recommendations are offered to help resolve statutory non-compliance and access issues, as follows: (1) Authorities should examine underlying causal factors for the observed trends; (2) Process improvements should be made to better coordinate FDA and CMS activities to include sharing data, reducing duplication, and establishing clear criteria for “safe and effective” and “reasonable and necessary”; (3) A common identifier should be established to allow tracking and trending of applications between FDA and CMS databases; (4) Statutory requirements may need to be revised; and (5) An investigation should be undertaken to determine why NCDs are not issued for the majority of PMAs. Any process improvements should be made without creating additional safety risks and adversely impacting public health. Finally, additional studies are needed to fully characterize and better understand the trends identified in this research study.^

Retrospective assesment of the levonorgestrel intrauterine device to treat complex atypical hyperplasia and early endometrioid endometrial cancer

Objective: The primary objective of this project was to describe the efficacy of the Levonorgestrel Intrauterine Device (LIUD) for treatment of Complex Endometrial Cancer (CAH) and Grade 1 Endometrial Cancer (G1EEC) in terms of rate of Complete Response (CR) and Partial Response (PR) after 6 months of therapy. Finally, we assessed if any clinical or pathologic features were associated with response to the LIUD. ^ Methods: This study was a retrospective case series designed to report the response rate of patients with CAH or G1EEC treated with LIUD therapy. In addition, this study has a laboratory component to assess molecular predictors of response to LIUD therapy. Retrospective data already collected from patients diagnosed with CAH or EEC grade 1 and treated with LIUD therapy at MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) were used for this study. Patients from all ethnic and race groups were included. A Complete Response (CR) was defined in patients diagnosed with CAH if pathologic report at 6 months demonstrated either no evidence of hyperplasia or no atypia in the setting of simple or complex hyperplasia. Partial Response (PR) was recorded if disease downgraded to only CAH from G1EEC. No Response (NR) was recorded if pathologic report demonstrates no change (Stable Disease, SD) or progression to cancer (Progressive Disease, PD). We calculated the proportion of patients with complete response to LIUD therapy with 95% confidence interval. We compared the response rates (CR/PR vs NR) by obesity status (Obese if BMI > 40 kg/m2 vs non-obese if BMI <= 40 kg/m2) as well as other clinical and pathologic factors, such as age, uterine size (median size), and presence of exogenous progesterone effect. ^ Results: There were 39 patients diagnosed with either CAH or G1EEC treated with the LIUD. Of 39 patients, 12 did not have pathological results of biopsy at 6months time period. Of 27 evaluable patients, 17 were diagnosed with CAH and 10 with G1EEC. Overall response rate (RR) was 78% (95% CI = 62-94%) at 6 months, 18 patients had CR (4 in G1EEC; 14 in CAH), 3 patients had PR (3 in G1EEC), 3 had SD (1 in CAH; 2 in G1EEC), 3 had PD (2 in CAH; 1 in G1EEC). After histology stratification, RR at 6 months was 82.35% (14/17; 95%CI = 67.4-97.3%) in CAH and 70% (7/10; 95% CI = 41-98.4%) in G1EEC. ^ There was no difference in response (R) and no response (NR) based on BMI (p=0.56). He observed a trend showing association between age with response (p=0.1). There was no association between uterine size and response to therapy (p=0.17). We recorded strong association between exogenous progesterone effect and response. ^ Conclusion: LIUD therapy for the treatment of CAH and G1EEC may be effective and safe. Presence of exogenous progesterone effect may predict the response to LIUD therapy at earlier time points. There is need of further studies with larger sample size to explore the relationship of response with other clinical and pathologic factors^

Compactor device for large round bales

A compactor device for iarge round bales is disclosed comprising a horizontally disposed cylindrical housing containing a plunger, a double toggle mechanism connected to the plunger, a hydraulic cylinder connected to the double toggle mechanism for driving the plunger, and a stabilizer linkage connected to the plunger and the double toggle mechanism for maintaining the plunger in a vertical position during compaction of a bale.

Fluid pressure actuated net weighing device with pneumatic taring

The weighing device comprises a tension load cell including an upper liquid chamber and a lower air chamber which has a volume much greater than the volume of the liquid chamber. The weight of a suspended load and the load supporting structure on the load cell are applied on both chambers. A gauge reads the liquid pressure in the upper chamber and a valve unit connectible to a source of air under pressure is connected to the air chamber. The load cell is tared by initially adjusting the air pressure in the lower chamber to produce a zero reading on the gauge. When a load is applied on the device, the volume displacement of the air chamber is small relative to the volume displacement of the liquid in the upper chamber. The volume of the air chamber thus remains substantially constant so that the gauge indicates directly the net weight of the applied load.