Imaging acute complications in cancer patients: what should be evaluated in the emergency setting?

CT Imaging Findings in Patients with Ovarian Cancer and Acute Abdominal Symptoms: Experience at a Tertiary Cancer Center

PURPOSE

To evaluate computed tomography (CT) findings in patients with ovarian cancer presenting to a comprehensive cancer center's urgent care unit with acute abdominal symptoms.

METHODS

This retrospective study included consecutive patients with ovarian cancer who underwent abdominal CT at a comprehensive cancer center's urgent care unit between January 1, 2018, and January 14, 2020, due to acute abdominal symptoms. Two abdominal radiologists reviewed the abdominal CT reports, categorizing imaging findings as follows: (a) no new or acute finding, (b) new or increased bowel or gastric obstruction, (c) new or increased ascites, (d) new or increased peritoneal carcinomatosis, (e) new or increased nonperitoneal metastases, (f) new inflammatory or infectious changes, (g) new or increased hydronephrosis, (h) new or increased biliary dilatation, (i) new vascular complications, or (j) new bowel perforation.

RESULTS

A total of 200 patients (mean age, 59 years; range, 22-87) underwent a total of 259 abdominal CT scans, of which 217/259 (83.8%) scans were found to have new or increased findings. A total of 115/259 (44.4%) scans had only one finding while 102/259 (39.4%) scans had 2 or more findings. Altogether, 382 new or increased findings were detected: findings were most commonly related to bowel or gastric obstruction (92/382, 24.1%) with small bowel obstruction being the most common finding (80/382, 20.9%); ascites (78/382, 20.4%); peritoneal carcinomatosis (62/382, 16.2%); and nonperitoneal metastases (62/382, 16.2%). Inflammatory or infectious findings accounted for 30/382 (7.9%) findings.

CONCLUSION

Most patients with ovarian cancer presenting with acute abdominal had relevant positive findings on abdominal CT, with small bowel obstruction being the most common finding.

Emergency room imaging in pediatric patients with cancer: analysis of the spectrum and frequency of imaging modalities and findings in a tertiary cancer center and their relationship with survival

BACKGROUND

To assess the spectrum and frequency of modalities used for emergency room (ER) imaging and their findings in pediatric cancer patients and assess their relationship with survival.

METHODS

Consecutive pediatric cancer patients that underwent imaging during an ER visit at our tertiary cancer center over a 5-year period were retrospectively analyzed. Imaging findings were considered positive when they were relevant to the ER presenting complaint. Imaging positivity was correlated with inpatient admission. Overall survival (OS) was assessed with Kaplan-Meier curves and uni- and multi-variate Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify significant factors associated with OS.

RESULTS

Two hundred sixty-one patients (135 males and 126 females; median age 11 years [interquartile range 5-16 years] with 348 visits and a total of 406 imaging studies were included. Common chief complaints were related to the chest (100 [28.7 %]) and fever (99 [28.4 %]). ER imaging was positive in 207 visits (59.5 %), commonly revealing increased metastases (50 [14.4 %]), pneumonia (47 [13.5 %]), and other lung problems (12 [2.9 %]). Positive ER imaging was associated with inpatient admission (69.3 % [133/192] vs. 40.4 % [63/156], p < 0.01). Multivariate survival analysis showed that positive ER imaging (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.35 [95% CI 1.44-3.83, p < 0.01), admission (HR = 1.86 [95% CI 1.17-3.00], p < 0.01), number of ER visits (HR = 3.08 [95% CI 1.62-5.83], p < 0.01 for ≥ 3 visits) were associated with poorer survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Imaging was able to delineate the cause for ER visits in children with cancer in over half of the cases. Positive ER imaging was associated with admission and worse survival.

Twelve tips for interpreting abdominal CT scans

BACKGROUND

Abdominal computerised tomography (CT) scans are a crucial tool in the diagnosis and management of the acute abdomen. Currently, medical students are not widely and extensively trained in the interpretation of abdominal scans.

AIM

We aim to provide advice about interpreting abdominal CT scans.

METHODS

We used the critical reflection of our experiences, both in clinical practice and in teaching, alongside advice from the literature to develop these tips.

RESULTS

Twelve tips following the '4As, 3Bs, 2Cs and 1D' approach are presented to assist doctors and medical students with interpreting abdominal CT scans.

CONCLUSION

The early identification of pathology on CT scans has been demonstrated to improve patient outcomes in certain cases, while a formal radiologist's report is awaited. Following a systematic approach, such as the one we presented here, may aid trainees in looking at abdominal CT scans.

Evaluation and Management of Genitourinary Emergencies in Patients with Cancer

Background

Genitourinary emergencies in cancer patients are common. Most cancer treatments are administered in the outpatient setting, and patients with complications often visit the emergency department. However, there is no recent emergency medicine literature review focusing on genitourinary emergencies in the oncologic population. Objective of the review. To increase awareness of common genitourinary emergencies in patients with cancer and enable the prompt recognition and appropriate management of these conditions. Discussion. Genitourinary emergencies in patients with cancer require a multidisciplinary approach to treatment. The most common genitourinary emergencies in patients with cancer are related to infection, obstructive uropathy, hemorrhagic cystitis, and complications associated with urinary diversions. The treatment approach in patients with infections, including viral infections, is similar to those without cancer. Understanding the changes in the anatomy of patients with urinary diversions or fistulas can help with the management of genitourinary emergencies.

Conclusions

Familiarization with the uniqueness of genitourinary emergencies in patients with cancer is important for emergency physicians.

Imaging of acute abdomen in cancer patients

The pattern of disease causing acute abdominal pain has changed over last few decades, some of this has been attributed to intraabdominal cancers. The most common acute abdominal complaints in cancer patients are related to the gastrointestinal system. Abdominal emergencies in cancer patients can result from the underlying malignancy itself, cancer therapy and/or result from the standard pathologies causing acute abdomen in otherwise healthy population. Therapy-related or disease-related immunosuppression or high dose analgesics often blunt many of the findings which are usually expected in non-cancer general population. This complicates the clinical picture rendering the clinical exam less reliable in many cancer patients, and resulting in different pathologies which clinicians and the radiologists should remain aware of. This article focuses on imaging illustrations with differential diagnosis for various emergency scenarios related to acute abdomen specifically in oncologic settings.

Phytochemicals and Gastrointestinal Cancer: Cellular Mechanisms and Effects to Change Cancer Progression

Gastrointestinal (GI) cancer is a prevailing global health disease with a high incidence rate which varies by region. It is a huge economic burden on health care providers. GI cancer affects different organs in the body such as the gastric organs, colon, esophagus, intestine, and pancreas. Internal and external factors like smoking, obesity, urbanization, genetic mutations, and prevalence of Helicobacter pylori and Hepatitis B and Hepatitis C viral infections could increase the risk of GI cancer. Phytochemicals are non-nutritive bioactive secondary compounds abundantly found in fruits, grains, and vegetables. Consumption of phytochemicals may protect against chronic diseases like cardiovascular disease, neurodegenerative disease, and cancer. Multiple studies have assessed the chemoprotective effect of selected phytochemicals in GI cancer, offering support to their potential towards reducing the pathogenesis of the disease. The aim of this review was to summarize the current knowledge addressing the anti-cancerous effects of selected dietary phytochemicals on GI cancer and their molecular activities on selected mechanisms, i.e., nuclear factor kappa-light-chain-enhancer of activated B cells (NF-κB), detoxification enzymes, adenosine monophosphate activated protein kinase (AMPK), wingless-related integration site/β-catenin (wingless-related integration site (Wnt) β-catenin, cell apoptosis, phosphoinositide 3-kinases (PI3K)/ protein kinase B AKT/ mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK). In this review phytochemicals were classified into four main categories: (i) carotenoids, including lutein, lycopene, and β-carotene; (ii) proanthocyanidins, including quercetin and ellagic acid; (iii) organosulfur compounds, including allicin, allyl propyl disulphide, asparagusic acid, and sulforaphane; and (iv) other phytochemicals including pectin, curcumins, p-coumaric acid and ferulic acid. Overall, phytochemicals improve cancer prognosis through the downregulation of β-catenin phosphorylation, therefore enhancing apoptosis, and upregulation of the AMPK pathway, which supports cellular homeostasis. Nevertheless, more studies are needed to provide a better understanding of the mechanism of cancer treatment using phytochemicals and possible side effects associated with this approach.

New CT-based diagnoses of torso cancer is low in the emergency department setting

PURPOSE

The incidence of new CT-based torso cancer diagnoses and the most commonly diagnosed cancer types in the emergency department (ED) setting are unknown. The purpose of our study was to determine the incidence and types of new CT-based torso cancer diagnoses in the ED.

METHODS

A total of 19,496 CT reports including all or parts of the torso from 2017 were searched for the keywords: "mass", "tumor", "neoplasm", "malignancy", or "cancer". Each report and corresponding medical record was evaluated for presence of a new cancer. Cases were scored as no cancer, subcentimeter lung nodule, known cancer, new cancer, or suspicious, but unconfirmed for new cancer. Each mass was characterized as symptom-related or incidental.

RESULTS

At least one keyword was found in 2086 reports. Of these 706, 126 and 905 were known cancer cases, subcentimeter lung nodules, and non-cancerous cases, respectively. There were 251 confirmed new cancers and 98 suspicious cases which lacked adequate diagnostic workup. Depending on whether only definite or definite and suspicious cases were included together, the number of new cancer cases per 100 torso CT exams was 1.3 or 1.8, respectively. Gastrointestinal, lung, pancreaticobiliary, urinary, and gynecologic cancers were most common. Only 58 of the confirmed cases (23%) were deemed as incidental findings.

CONCLUSION

CT-diagnosis of new torso cancers was uncommon in our setting. Still, while extensive knowledge of cancer staging may not be necessary for ED radiologists, knowledge of the most common types of cancer including gastrointestinal, lung, pancreaticobiliary, urinary, and gynecologic cancers may improve sensitivity for these diagnoses and may expedite appropriate referrals for the newly diagnosed patients.

Imaging of Oncologic Emergencies

Oncologic emergencies can be either the result of the primary tumor, its metastasis, a paraneoplastic syndrome or reaction to the chemotherapy. Imaging plays a crucial role in ensuring a prompt diagnosis as well as assisting in the therapeutic management. In this article, we discuss the common thoracic and abdominal oncological emergencies that may be encountered in an emergency department.

Role of computed tomography at a cancer center emergency department

To evaluate the imaging methods used at the emergency department (ED) of a cancer center, with emphasis on computed tomography (CT). A descriptive, retrospective, single-center study was conducted by reviewing imaging exams and medical records, after approval of the institution's Ethics Review Board. The demographic data, cancer history, and imaging exam requested were evaluated for all patients and the indications and results of head, chest, and abdominopelvic CT scans were also evaluated. During the study period, there were 8710 visits to the ED, and 5999 imaging studies were requested in 3788 patients (43.5 % of total of visits). One thousand eight hundred twenty-nine CT exams were used in 1121 visits (12.9 % of total of visits). The mean age of patients was 57.7 years and most patients (93.2 %) had a known primary tumor. The most common indications for abdominopelvic CT were non-oncologic emergencies (26.7 %) and postoperative complications (19.2 %), and the results were negative in 36.6 %, positive for clinical suspicion in 49.0 %, and incidental positive in 14.5 %. The most frequent indication for chest CT was suspected pulmonary embolism (34.4 %); however, only 11.1 % confirmed the diagnosis. The results of head TC were negative in 72.9 % and the indications that had more positive findings were suspected metastasis (32.1 %) and focal neurological sign/altered level of consciousness (24.5 %). CT plays an important role in driving the cancer patients visiting the ED. However, the high rate of negative or discordant results causes a concern for the inadvertent and excessive use of this imaging modality.