Showing posts with label screening. Show all posts
Showing posts with label screening. Show all posts

Friday, November 2, 2018

GE Healthcare new fetalHQ software streamlines evaluation of congenital heart diseases


The ultrasonologist can now assess the size, shape, and function of the fetal heart in less than 3 minutes with the GE Healthcare new fetalHQ software. Evaluating fetal heart and ruling out congenital heart anomalies is complicated at 18-20 weeks. This condition is not uncommon and affects one out of every 110 babies around the world.

At this gestational age, the fetal heart is exceptionally complex, just the size of a grape and the rate is near twice the adult heart rate. GE new tool – fetalHQ runs on GE Healthcare’s Voluson ultrasound systems and is the first tool to simultaneously examine the size, shape, and function of the fetal heart.

fetalHQ is the brainchild of Greggory DeVore, M.D., a specialist in maternal-fetal medicine at Huntington Hospital, Pasadena, California. He got inspired to develop the software from another software that used speckle tracking analysis to map the motion of tissues in the heart. This software was regularly used by adult and pediatric cardiologist to assess the function of the heart.

Dr. DeVore installed the software and reprogrammed it to visualize the fetal heart in 24 segments and map it in a way that was never done earlier.

“This was the genesis of the creativity behind using this software,” DeVore said. “From this, we made several measurements of the heart’s size, shape, and contractility – or how it’s squeezing. We immediately got to work and published 13 peer-reviewed articles that described the clinical value of this software.”

Here is a video showing the fetalHQ‘s automatic delineation of the fetal heart’s shape




Thursday, May 24, 2018

3-D Printed Models of cervix developed to train doctors in cervical cancer screening and treatment

The researchers from Rice University

Many resource-poor settings are not able to provide cervical cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment of women population because of lack of training. A team of students from Rice University has designed a 3-D Printed Models of the cervix that can help the healthcare providers to train them to carry out screening and provide treatment for cervical cancer.

This will be specifically used for training doctors and nurses in developing countries and low-resource areas in the U.S.

Cervical cancer kills nearly 300,000 women every year and more than 80% deaths are reported in developing countries. In about 90% of patients, the cervical cancer is preventable.



Rice students Christine Luk, Elizabeth Stone and Rachel Lambert are senior design students enrolled in the course Global Health Design. Together with graduate student Sonia Parra, they developed a low-cost, interactive training model that mimics a woman’s pelvic region and can be used to practice different cervical cancer screening and treatment procedures.

The simple device includes different models of cervix showing evolving stages of cervical cancer from entirely normal to pre-cancerous to definitive cancer.  The models fit into holder placed at the back of the device.

The training doctor or nurse can have real-life experience of what it looks like at the doctor’s office after the speculum is inserted and the cervix is visualized. The models can easily be switched around to simulate different conditions of the cervix and they also respond to the application of hot water just as a gynecologist applies acetic acid in clinical settings.

In addition to the training aspect, the device also is handy in teaching the doctors and nurses about how to proceed with abnormal results of the screening tests or a lesion is seen during the examination.

Some cervical models are made of a ballistic gel, that allows the doctors to practice colposcopy, cervical biopsy; cryotherapy, and loop electrosurgical excision procedure at low costs.

“Here in the states we have the ability to perform Pap smears and other practices, but in other countries where this model is used, such as Mozambique and El Salvador, they may not have the necessary infrastructure to do so,” Christine Luk said. “That’s why it’s important that this model can train as many procedures as possible.”

The students have already tested the device in training clinics in El Salvador and the Rio Grande Valley in Texas. Each training session is modified to fit the specific needs of an area.

The team from Rice is trying to collaborate with manufacturers to mass produce the device for areas in need so newly trained medical providers can train others.


Here is a video about how the device works





Thursday, July 27, 2017

Hypertensive disorders during pregnancy predisposes to future hypertension and the risk persists for more than 20 years.


Women face substantially high risk of post pregnancy hypertension in the first year after the index pregnancy and the risk persists for more than 20 years, with 14- 32% for the first decade reports the result of a nationwide register based cohort study published in July issue of BMJ.

Nearly one third of women with hypertensive disorder of pregnancy will develop hypertension within 10 years of the affected pregnancy, so blood pressure monitoring should be initiated immediately after delivery.  

What is already known:
Women who have a history of hypertensive disorders while pregnant have 2 to 4-fold increased risk of developing essential hypertension, and a subsequent CV event.

But the data about the timing of developing hypertension and the time at which the screening of these at-risk women should begin is not known.

What the study adds:
This study gives us the chronology of events: How soon the women may develop hypertension, how long the risk will persist after the affected pregnancy and when to start monitoring these women for development of hypertension.

The study identified 482972 women through Danish civil registration system, of these 23235 (4.8%) women developed hypertensive disorder of pregnancy and 16611 developed hypertension during follow-up.

In a cohort of more than one million women delivering in Denmark from 1978-2012, the investigators formed two cohorts and followed them for estimation of cumulative incidence of post-pregnancy hypertension and the other cohort for the estimation of hazard ratios for post-pregnancy hypertension.

Women with chronic hypertension were excluded from the study.

In women who had normotensive first pregnancy in 20s, 30s, or 40s, the cumulative incidences of hypertension in the first 10 years after delivery were 4.0%, 5.7%, and 11.3%, respectively, whereas in women with hypertensive disorder the corresponding incidence were 13.7%, 20.3%, and 32.4%, respectively.

In women with history of hypertensive disorder in most recent pregnancy, the rates of developing hypertension were 12-fold to 25-fold higher in the first-year after delivery and up to 10-fold higher in the coming 10 years.

Women face 2 fold increase risk of developing hypertension, that lasts for the next 20 years, if they have a previous history of hypertensive disorder in pregnancy as compared to women who had normal blood pressure while pregnant.

Why this study is important:
Large cohort, elimination of selection and recall bias.

Data adjusted for age, parity, smoking status, diabetes and BMI.

Immediate post-partum period is very important: The risk of developing hypertension is highest shortly after an affected pregnancy but persists for more than 20 years.

The higher risk of hypertension in a decade after the affected pregnancy also indicates that the etiopathological process causing hypertension in later life, are already at play during the affected pregnancy.

A hypertensive disorder of pregnancy in the second pregnancy was more strongly associated with later hypertension than a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy in the first pregnancy.

Initiation of regular blood pressure assessments should begin soon after a pregnancy complicated by a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy for prompt identification of hypertension in these women.

What is needed in the future:
An algorithm to identify those at greatest risk (the subgroup most likely to benefit from screening) is urgently needed; identification of biomarkers that predict which women will develop hypertension after an affected pregnancy would be very useful.

Quantification of cardiovascular events that can be prevented by early identification of these at-risk women is also needed.

More randomized control trials to form policies on clinical follow up of such women.


Monday, May 8, 2017

Today is World Ovarian Cancer day, let’s join in to increase the awareness and save lives.



World Ovarian Cancer day is celebrated on May 8th each year to save lives by increasing the awareness about this deadly disease.

Ovarian cancer has got the lowest survival rate and often diagnosed at very late stage among all gynecological malignancies. Ovarian Cancer day was first celebrated on May 8th, 2013 when cancer organization all around the world came together to educate the women about symptoms and signs of this malignancy.

Some facts about Ovarian Cancer:
Ovarian cancer is the seventh most common cancer in women worldwide (18 most common cancer overall), with 239,000 new cases diagnosed in 2012.

It is responsible for 140,000 deaths each year. Statistics show that just 45% of women with ovarian cancer are likely to survive for five years compared to up to 89% of women with breast cancer.

Fiji had the highest rate of ovarian cancer, followed by Latvia and Bulgaria.

The five-year prevalence of women globally living with ovarian cancer is 22.6 per 100,000.

Risk factors for developing ovarian cancer:
Age > 55 years, family history, known carrier of abnormalities in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes, Nulliparity, never taken the contraceptive pill, long reproductive life span (early menarche and late menopause) and history of endometriosis.

Screening:
There is no “standard” screening test for asymptomatic, low-risk patients, and the only patient populations that should be recommended for ovarian cancer screening are patients with known BRCA germline mutations and women with family members who have had ovarian cancer or breast cancer.

Two common screening tests for high-risk patients include pelvic ultrasound and checking CA 125 levels. But CA 125 is elevated in only 50 percent of stage I ovarian cancers, and many other conditions can falsely elevate the levels, including endometriosis, liver disease and post abdominal surgery. Following a positive screening test, a diagnostic test is required. False positive tests lead to an increase in complications compared to usual follow up. In fact, there are no studies that show screening for ovarian cancer improves survival.

Symptoms:
Ovarian cancer does not have any early symptoms. Often the symptoms are common to other less serious conditions and are often overlooked.

Awareness about risk factors and family/genetic history is the key to clinch the diagnosis at early stage.

If a women experiences following symptoms on most days within a three-week period, she should be investigated: Change in bowel habits, frequent bloating, feeling full very quickly, abdominal or pelvic pain and increased urgency/frequency of urination.

Check out this excellent video by AstraZeneca on World Ovarian Cancer Day.


Friday, April 28, 2017

USPSTF final recommendation statement favor screening for preeclampsia throughout pregnancy.


The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) today issued its final recommendations for preeclampsia screening by monitoring the blood pressure throughout pregnancy with grade B, meaning there exists substantial net benefit for the mother and infant because of screening.

The recommendations, accompanying editorial and systematic review evidence was published online 25 April 2017 in JAMA.

USPSTF has earlier released a draft recommendation on September 27, 2016 which was open to public comments till October 2017.

The task force last full review of this topic was in 1996. The topic was again reviewed recently in light of new evidence and change in definition of preeclampsia.

The current recommendation states that Blood Pressure measurement should be done at each antenatal visit. No timing interval is mentioned.

The screening applies to all pregnant women without a known diagnosis of preeclampsia or being at high risk for the disease.

Conditions associated with increased risks are previous history of eclampsia or preeclampsia (particularly early-onset preeclampsia), medical morbidities associated includes DM 1 or 2, GDM, chronic hypertension, renal disease, and autoimmune diseases), previous history of adverse pregnancy outcome and multifetal gestation.

Other risk factors include nulliparity, obesity, African American race, low socioeconomic status, and advanced maternal age.

Evidence did not suggest point of care urine testing when screening for preeclampsia because it alone could not predict the health outcome.

Recently revised criteria for the diagnosis of preeclampsia include:
  • elevated blood pressure (≥140/90 mm Hg on 2 occasions 4 hours apart, after 20 weeks of gestation)
  • and either proteinuria (≥300 mg/dL on a 24-hour urine protein test, protein to creatinine ratio of ≥0.3 mg/mmol, or urine protein dipstick reading >1 if quantitative analysis is not available)
  • or, in the absence of proteinuria, thrombocytopenia, renal insufficiency, impaired liver function, pulmonary edema, or cerebral or visual symptoms.

The USPSTF further recommends low dose aspirin (81 mg/d) after 12 weeks of gestation for all women at high risk for preeclampsia.

Other Obstetrics and Gynecology societies like The Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada, The National Institute for Health(NIH) and Care Excellence recommends urinalysis for proteinuria at each antenatal visit.

The ACOG only recommends B.P. measurements at every visit with detailed history to evaluate the risk.

“Preeclampsia and CVDs including hypertension are bound not only by common pathophysiology but also epidemiology” said Nisha I. Parikh, MD, and Juan Gonzalez, MD, PhD, from the University of California, San Francisco, in an accompanying editorial published simultaneously in JAMA Internal Medicine.

"Pregnancy is essentially a cardiovascular stress test, and the development of preeclampsia among other pregnancy complications is the earliest marker of patients at risk for future [cardiovascular disease].” They further added.

The full text of recommendation statement in JAMA can be assessed here.

The accompanying editorial in JAMA can be accessed here.

The accompanying editorial in JAMA cardiology can be accessed here.

The accompanying editorial in JAMA Internal Medicine can be accessed here.





Tuesday, January 12, 2016

USPSTF recommends biennial breast cancer screening beginning at age 50.





The USPSTF today once more made an important update to its 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for breast cancer. The USPSTF recommends biennial screening mammography for women aged 50 to 74 years. (B recommendation).These recommendations were published in the on-line issue of Annals of Internal Medicine on January 12, 2016.



Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations for Average-Risk Women

Agency issuing guidelines
Recommendations
USPSTF 2015

40–49 years
Screening decision should be an informed, individual one, after she weighs the potential benefit against the potential harms.( C recommendations )
50–74 years
Mammography every 2 years (B recommendation)
≥75 years
Data were not sufficient to establish the benefits of mammography screening in women aged 75 years or older.( I statement)
ACOG            

40 years ≥
Annual mammograms beginning at age 40.
ACS

 45 years
Annual screening beginning at age 45
45-54 years
Annual screening
55 and older
Transition to biennial screening or have the opportunity to continue screening annually depending upon personal preference. Women should continue screening mammography as long as their overall health is good and they have a life expectancy of 10 years or longer
NCCN

40 years ≥
Clinical breast exam every 6-12 + annual mammogram beginning at age 40years.

Upper age limit for screening not established; screening can continue if the woman is in good health and is expected to live at least 10 more years
  

Breast cancer is the second-leading cause of cancer death among women in the United States.

In 2015, an estimated 232 000 women were diagnosed with the disease and 40,000 women died of it.

There are approximately 125 new cases of breast cancer and about 22 deaths per 100 000 U.S. women each year. The mean age at diagnosis has remained unchanged at 64 years since the late 1970s.

It is most frequently diagnosed among women aged 55 to 64 years, and the median age of death from breast cancer is 68 years.

Across all ages, screening mammography has a sensitivity of approximately 77% to 95% and a specificity of about 94% to 97%

Dr.Christine Laine praises the USPSTF in an accompanying editorial saying that “The USPSTF did a difficult job well, considering updated evidence reviews, fuller panoply of potential harms, and tradeoffs of different screening strategies.”

She also said that “ Although for many years the dogma was that women should have mammograms “once a year for a lifetime” starting at age 40 years, current evidence shows that the balance of risks and benefits of screening, particularly among women in their 40s, warrants more nuanced decision making. Potential harms of over diagnosis and overtreatment of lesions with little progressive potential and harms of false-positive screening results with unnecessary biopsies and multiple repeated examinations must be considered”.

The following recommendation (originally issued in 2009) still stands: Each average-risk woman between the ages of 40 and 49 years should make her own decision about whether to have a mammogram, based on her personal balancing of the benefits and harms of screening (a grade “C” recommendation).


Benefit of Screening

Over a 10-year period, screening 10 000 women aged 60 to 69 years will result in 21 (95% CI, 11 to 32) fewer breast cancer deaths. The benefit is smaller in younger women: Screening 10 000 women aged 50 to 59 years will result in 8 (CI, 2 to 17) fewer breast cancer deaths, and screening 10 000 women aged 40 to 49 years will result in 3 (CI, 0 to 9) fewer breast cancer deaths.


Harms of screening

The harms of screening are over diagnosis and over screening that is diagnosis and treatment of non invasive and invasive cancer that would never have been detected in the absence of screening. Existing technology does not allow us to segregate with precision about how much is over diagnosis and how much was real diagnosis.

The best estimates from randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of mammography screening on breast cancer mortality suggest that 1 in 5 women diagnosed with breast cancer over approximately 10 years will be over diagnosed.

Based on data from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program: The baseline breast cancer incidence rate was 105 to 111 cases per 100 000 women (depending on whether one considers invasive disease or invasive plus noninvasive disease together). With the widespread diffusion of mammography screening in last 30 years, this rate increased to 165 cases of noninvasive plus invasive disease per 100 000 women in 2011 (an excess of 54 to 60 cases per 100 000 women, or about a 50% increase).

Breast cancer mortality rates have declined at a slower rate, from 31 to 22 cases (or a reduction of 9 deaths) per 100,000 women over the same time period.

The USPSTF concludes that while there are harms of mammography, the benefit of screening mammography outweighs the harms by at least a moderate amount from age 50 to 74 years and is greatest for women in their 60s. For women in their 40s, the number who benefit from starting regular screening mammography is smaller and the number experiencing harm is larger compared with older women.

The current recommendations by USPSTF are based upon modeling studies conducted in support by the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET). The investigators at CISNET evaluated data from six models that were grouped according to various screening strategies, various starting age and frequency.  The model with no screening served as reference.

It was seen that strategies involving screening every 2 years were consistently the most efficient for women at average risk for breast cancer.

The models showed that for women in the age group 50 to 74 years, biennial screening would prevent a median of seven breast-cancer deaths, compared with no screening vs. if the screening started at age 40, three additional breast cancer deaths would be prevented, but there would be 1988 more false-positive results and seven more over diagnoses for every 1000 women screened.


Dissatisfaction with the updated guidelines.

Many of the National agencies like National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and M.D. Anderson Cancer Center are continue to screen women annually beginning at age 40 till she is within a decade of the predicted end of her life according to Therese Bevers, MD, medical director of the Cancer Prevention Center at the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, and chair of NCCN guideline panels on breast cancer screening and diagnosis and breast cancer risk reduction.

National breast cancer screening programs in other countries like the United Kingdom,  Netherlands, Switzerland, Poland, Norway, Luxembourg, Germany, Finland, Denmark, and Belgium offer mammography screening every 2 to 3 years for women aged 50 up to 74 years.


References: