Intrapartum fetal surveillance: a physiological approach

Continuous utero-placental circulation, and patent umbilical blood vessels ensure an uninterrupted transfer of oxygen and nutrients to the fetus as well as clearance of metabolic waste products. The onset of labour characterized by progressive and strong uterine contractions poses a threat to fetal oxygenation as a result of collapsing the spiral arterioles traversing the myometrium to supply the placental bed, and repetitive compression of the blood vessels within the umbilical cord. Human fetuses are equipped with compensatory mechanisms to cope with transient interruptions of blood supply during labour. The ability to compensate may be blunted in cases of poor fetal reserves, increased metabolic demand (macrosomia or maternal fever), and due to non-hypoxic pathways (e.g. chorioamniontis or fetal hypovolumia-hypotension syndrome). Intrapartum fetal surveillance involves prompt recognition of the features that signal the onset of fetal decompensation on the cardiotocograph (CTG) to ensure a timely intervention to avoid hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy (HIE) or perinatal deaths. This article summarises a ‘physiological approach’ to the interpretation of the CTG which, in places, conflicts with other current UK guidance.     

Surgical resection after neoadjuvant durvalumab and radiation is feasible and safe in non–small cell lung cancer: Results from a randomized trial

ObjectiveSeveral trials have recently reported the safety of pulmonary resection after neoadjuvant immunotherapy with encouraging major pathological response rates. We report the detailed adverse events profile from a recently conducted randomized phase II trial in patients with resectable non–small cell lung cancer treated with neoadjuvant durvalumab alone or with sub-ablative radiation.MethodsWe conducted a randomized phase II trial in patients with non–small cell lung cancer clinical stages I to IIIA who were randomly assigned to receive neoadjuvant durvalumab alone or with sub-ablative radiation (8Gyx3). Secondary end points included the safety of 2 cycles of preoperative durvalumab with and without radiation followed by pulmonary resection. Postoperative adverse events within 30 days were recorded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0).ResultsSixty patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, with planned resection performed in 26 patients in each arm. Baseline demographics and clinical variables were balanced between groups. The median operative time was similar between arms: 128 minutes (97-201) versus 146 minutes (109-214) (P = .314). There was no 30- or 90-day mortality. Grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 10 of 26 patients (38%) after monotherapy and in 10 of 26 patients (38%) after dual therapy. Anemia requiring transfusion and hypotension were the 2 most common adverse events. The median length of stay was similar between arms (5 days vs 4 days, P = .172).ConclusionsIn this randomized trial, the addition of sub-ablative focal radiation to durvalumab in the neoadjuvant setting was not associated with increased mortality or morbidity compared with neoadjuvant durvalumab alone.     

MR-safety in clinical practice at 7T: Evaluation of a multistep screening process in 1819 subjects

IntroductionMR facilities must implement and maintain adequate screening and safety procedures to ensure safety during MR examinations. The aim of this study was to evaluate a multi-step MR safety screening process used at a 7T facility regarding incidence of different types of safety risks detected during the safety procedure.MethodsSubjects scheduled for an MR examination and having entered the 7T facility during 2016–2019 underwent a pre-defined multi-step MR safety screening process. Screening documentation of 1819 included subjects was reviewed, and risks identified during the different screening steps were compiled. These data were also related to documented decisions made by a 7T MR safety committee and reported MR safety incidents.ResultsPassive or active implants (n = 315) were identified in a screening form and/or an additional documented interview in 305 subjects. Additional information not previously self-reported by the subject, regarding implants necessitating safety decisions performed by the staff was revealed in the documented interview in 102 subjects (106 items). In total, the 7T MR safety committee documented a decision in 36 (2%) of the included subjects. All of these subjects were finally cleared for scanning.ConclusionA multi-step screening process allows a thorough MR screening of subjects, avoiding safety incidents. Different steps in the process allow awareness to rise and items to be detected that were missed in earlier steps.Implications for practiceSafety questions posed at a single timepoint during an MR screening process might not reveal all safety risks. Repetition and rephrasing of screening questions leads to increased detection of safety risks. This could be effectively mitigated by a multi-step screening process. A multi-disciplinary safety committee is efficient at short notice responding to unexpected safety issues.