Heat Sink Effect on Tumor Ablation Characteristics as Observed in Monopolar Radiofrequency,Bipolar Radiofrequency,and Microwave,Using Ex Vivo Calf Liver Model

Thermal ablation of liver tumors near large blood vessels is affected by the cooling effect of blood flow, leading to incomplete ablation. Hence, we conducted a comparative investigation of heat sink effect in monopolar (MP) and bipolar (BP) radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and microwave (MW) ablation devices.With a perfused calf liver, the ablative performances (volume, mass, density, dimensions), with and without heat sink, were measured. Heat sink was present when the ablative tip of the probes were 8.0 mm close to a major hepatic vein and absent when >30 mm away. Temperatures (T1 and T2) on either side of the hepatic vein near the tip of the probes, heating probe temperature (T3), outlet perfusate temperature (T4), and ablation time were monitored.With or without heat sink, BP radiofrequency ablated a larger volume and mass, compared with MP RFA or MW ablation, with latter device producing the highest density of tissue ablated. MW ablation produced an ellipsoidal shape while radiofrequency devices produced spheres.Percentage heat sink effect in Bipolar radiofrequency : Mono-polar radiofrequency : Microwave was (Volume) 33:41:22; (mass) 23:56:34; (density) 9.0:26:18; and (relative elipscity) 5.8:12.9:1.3, indicating that BP and MW devices were less affected.Percentage heat sink effect on time (minutes) to reach maximum temperature (W) = 13.28:9.2:29.8; time at maximum temperature (X) is 87:66:16.66; temperature difference (Y) between the thermal probes (T3) and the temperature (T1 + T2)/2 on either side of the hepatic vessel was 100:87:20; and temperature difference between the (T1 + T2)/2 and temperature of outlet circulating solution (T4), Z was 20.33:30.23:37.5.MW and BP radiofrequencies were less affected by heat sink while MP RFA was the most affected. With a single ablation, BP radiofrequency ablated a larger volume and mass regardless of heat sink.     

Simeprevir added to peginterferon and ribavirin lessens time with fatigue,depressive symptoms and functional limitations in patients with chronic hepatitis C compared with peginterferon and ribavirin: results from 1161 patients in the QUEST‐1, QUEST‐2 and PROMISE studies

The value of adding simeprevir (SMV) vs placebo (PBO) to peginterferon and ribavirin (PR) for treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus infection was examined using patient‐reported outcomes (PROs); further, concordance of PROs with virology endpoints and adverse events (AEs) was explored. Patients (n = 768 SMV/PR, n = 393 PBO/PR) rated fatigue (FSS), depressive symptoms (CES‐D) and functional impairment (WPAI: Hepatitis C Productivity, Daily Activity and Absenteeism) at baseline and throughout treatment in three randomised, double‐blind trials comparing the addition of SMV or PBO during initial 12 weeks of PR. PR was administered for 48 weeks (PBO group) and 24/48 weeks (SMV group) using a response‐guided therapy (RGT) approach. Mean PRO scores (except Absenteeism) worsened from baseline to Week 4 to the same extent in both groups but reverted after Week 24 for SMV/PR and only after Week 48 for PBO/PR. Accordingly, there was a significantly lower area under the curve (baseline–Week 60, AUC₆₀) and fewer weeks with clinically important worsening of scores in the SMV/PR group at any time point. Incidences of patients with fatigue and anaemia AEs were similar in both groups, but FSS scores showed that clinically important increases in fatigue lasted a mean of 6.9 weeks longer with PBO/PR (P < 0.001). PRO score subgroup analysis indicated better outcomes for patients who met the criteria for RGT or achieved sustained virological response 12 weeks post‐treatment (SVR12); differences in mean PRO scores associated with fibrosis level were only observed with PBO/PR. Greater efficacy of SMV/PR enabled reduced treatment duration and reduced time with PR‐related AEs without adding to AE severity.     

The primary health care physician and the cancer patient: tips and strategies for managing sexual health

There is a large and growing population of long-term cancer survivors. Primary care physicians (PCPs) are playing an increasingly greater role in the care of these patients across the continuum of cancer survivorship. In this role, PCPs are faced with the responsibility of managing a range of medical and psychosocial late effects of cancer treatment. In particular, the sexual side effects of treatment which are common and have significant impact on quality of life for the cancer survivor, often go unaddressed. This is an area of clinical care and research that has received increasing attention, highlighted by the presentation of this special issue on Cancer and Sexual Health. The aims of this review are 3-fold. First, we seek to overview common presentations of sexual dysfunction related to major cancer diagnoses in order to give the PCP a sense of the medical issues that the survivor may present with. Barriers to communication about sexual health issues between patient/PCPs in order are also described in order to emphasize the importance of PCPs initiating this important conversation. Next, we provide strategies and resources to help guide the PCP in the management of sexual dysfunction in cancer survivors. Finally, we discuss case examples of survivorship sexual health issues and highlight the role that a PCP can play in each of these case examples.