Patient navigation across the cancer care continuum: An overview of systematic reviews and emerging literature

Patient navigation is a strategy for overcoming barriers to reduce disparities and to improve access and outcomes. The aim of this umbrella review was to identify, critically appraise, synthesize, and present the best available evidence to inform policy and planning regarding patient navigation across the cancer continuum. Systematic reviews examining navigation in cancer care were identified in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Epistemonikos, and Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) databases and in the gray literature from January 1, 2012, to April 19, 2022. Data were screened, extracted, and appraised independently by two authors. The JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Review and Research Syntheses was used for quality appraisal. Emerging literature up to May 25, 2022, was also explored to capture primary research published beyond the coverage of included systematic reviews. Of the 2062 unique records identified, 61 systematic reviews were included. Fifty-four reviews were quantitative or mixed-methods reviews, reporting on the effectiveness of cancer patient navigation, including 12 reviews reporting costs or cost-effectiveness outcomes. Seven qualitative reviews explored navigation needs, barriers, and experiences. In addition, 53 primary studies published since 2021 were included. Patient navigation is effective in improving participation in cancer screening and reducing the time from screening to diagnosis and from diagnosis to treatment initiation. Emerging evidence suggests that patient navigation improves quality of life and patient satisfaction with care in the survivorship phase and reduces hospital readmission in the active treatment and survivorship care phases. Palliative care data were extremely limited. Economic evaluations from the United States suggest the potential cost-effectiveness of navigation in screening programs.     

Transient left bundle branch block after posture change to the prone position during general anesthesia: A case report

Rationale:The prone position is commonly used in spinal surgery. There have been many studies on hemodynamic changes in the prone position during general anesthesia. We report a rare case of transient left bundle branch block (LBBB) in a prone position.Patient concern:Electrocardiogram (ECG) of a 64-year-old man scheduled for spinal surgery showed normal sinus rhythm change to LBBB after posture change to the prone position.Diagnosis:Twelve lead ECG revealed LBBB. His coronary angio-computed tomography results showed right coronary artery with 30% to 40% stenosis and left circumflex artery with 40% to 50% stenosis. The patient was diagnosed with stable angina and second-degree atrioventricular block of Mobitz type II.Intervention:Nitroglycerin was administered intravenously during surgery. Adequate oxygen was supplied to the patient. After surgery, the patient was prescribed clopidogrel, statins, angiotensin II receptor blocker, and a permanent pacemaker was inserted.Outcome:Surgery was completed without complications. After surgery, the transient LBBB changed to a normal sinus rhythm. The patient did not complain of chest pain or dyspnea.Lesson:The prone position causes significant hemodynamic changes. A high risk of cardiovascular disease may cause ischemic heart disease and ECG changes. Therefore, careful management is necessary.     

Relation Between Tumor Size and Lymph Node Metastasis According to Subtypes of Breast Cancer

PurposeTumor size and lymph node metastasis are important factors that contribute to the progression of breast cancer. We aimed to analyze the relationship between tumor size and lymph node metastasis molecular subtype and examine the effects of nodal metastasis on overall survival (OS).MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the data of 16,552 patients who underwent breast surgery in Samsung Medical Center between 2000 and 2015. Information on tumor size (largest diameter of the invasive component), number of positive lymph nodes, and molecular subtype were obtained. We constructed a linear regression model to evaluate the relationship between tumor size and lymph node metastasis. To determine the effect of nodal metastasis on OS, we performed a Cox proportional regression analysis with Np/T (number of metastatic lymph nodes [n]/tumor size [cm]).ResultsThis study included 12,007 patients with a median follow-up of 62 months. The linear regression coefficients were 1.043 for luminal A, 1.024 for luminal B, 0.656 for HER2, and 0.435 for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) subtypes. No significant difference was observed in the coefficients between the luminal A and B subtypes (p = 0.797), while all other coefficients showed significant difference. After adjusting for other risk factors, the hazard ratio (HR) of Np/T for each subtype was significant for OS: luminal A (HR, 1.134; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.097–1.171; p < 0.001), luminal B (HR, 1.049; 95% CI, 1.013–1.086; p = 0.007), HER2 (HR, 1.069; 95% CI, 1.014–1.126; p = 0.013), and TNBC (HR, 1.038; 95% CI, 1.01–1.067; p = 0.008).ConclusionThe incidence of lymph node metastasis differed according to molecular subtype. Luminal types have higher incidence of nodal metastasis than HER2 and TNBC. The HR of Np/T was highest in luminal A subtypes and lowest in TNBC subtypes.     

Comparative Outcome Analysis of N-Butyl Cyanoacrylate Embolization of the False Lumen Versus Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in Aortic Dissection

PurposeTo evaluate the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of N-butyl cyanoacrylate (NBCA) embolization for the treatment of aortic dissection.Materials and MethodsIn this single-center retrospective study conducted from February 2003 to June 2019, NBCA embolization of an aortic false lumen was attempted in 12 patients (median age, 59 y; range, 41–68 y) and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) was performed in 53 patients (median age, 59 y; range, 37–70 y) for aortic dissection with one or more indications of persisting pain, malperfusion, rupture or impending rupture, maximal aortic diameter ≥ 55 mm, and/or rapid aortic enlargement. The main exclusion criterion for embolization was the presence of fast blood flow in the aortic false lumen on aortography. The efficacy of NBCA embolization and TEVAR was compared by evaluating technical and clinical outcomes, repeat intervention–free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS).ResultsTechnical success was achieved in 11 of the 12 patients treated with NBCA embolization (91.7%), and clinical success was achieved in 9 of these 11 (81.8%). No significant difference was found between embolization and TEVAR in clinical success rates (embolization, 81.8%; TEVAR, 84.9%; P = .409) or procedure-related complications (embolization, 1 patient [8.3%]; TEVAR, 4 patients [7.5%]; P = .701). In addition, embolization showed comparable 5-y RFS (embolization, 82.5% ± 9.3; TEVAR, 85.5% ± 4.8; P = .641) and 5-y OS (embolization, 100%; TEVAR, 95.4% ± 3.2; P = .744) rates to TEVAR.ConclusionsNBCA embolization of the false lumen in aortic dissection seems to be a safe and effective treatment modality for the closure of false lumen in selected patients.