Dataset Information

Literature Review of Vaginal Stenosis and Dilator Use in Radiation Oncology.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Guidelines for the care of women undergoing pelvic radiation therapy (RT) recommend vaginal dilator therapy (VDT) to prevent radiation-induced vaginal stenosis (VS); however, no standard protocol exists. This review seeks to update our current state of knowledge concerning VS and VDT in radiation oncology.

Methods and materials

A comprehensive literature review (1972-2017) was conducted using search terms "vaginal stenosis," "radiation," and "vaginal dilator." Information was organized by key concepts including VS definition, time course, pathophysiology, risk factors, and interventions.

Results

VS is a well-described consequence of pelvic RT, with early manifestations and late changes evolving over several years. Strong risk factors for VS include RT dose and volume of vagina irradiated. Resultant vaginal changes can interfere with sexual function and correlational studies support the use of preventive VDT. The complexity of factors that drive noncompliance with VDT is well recognized. There are no prospective data to guide optimal duration of VDT, and the consistency with which radiation oncologists monitor VS and manage its consequences is unknown.

Conclusions

This review provides information concerning VS definition, pathophysiology, and risk factors and identifies domains of VDT practice that are understudied. Prospective efforts to monitor and measure outcomes of patients who are prescribed VDT are needed to guide practice.

SUBMITTER: Damast S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7944435 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Literature Review of Vaginal Stenosis and Dilator Use in Radiation Oncology.

Damast Shari S Jeffery Diana D DD Son Christina H CH Hasan Yasmin Y Carter Jeanne J Lindau Stacy Tessler ST Jhingran Anuja A

Practical radiation oncology 20190711 6

<h4>Purpose</h4>Guidelines for the care of women undergoing pelvic radiation therapy (RT) recommend vaginal dilator therapy (VDT) to prevent radiation-induced vaginal stenosis (VS); however, no standard protocol exists. This review seeks to update our current state of knowledge concerning VS and VDT in radiation oncology.<h4>Methods and materials</h4>A comprehensive literature review (1972-2017) was conducted using search terms "vaginal stenosis," "radiation," and "vaginal dilator." Information ...[more]

PMID: 31302301

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeAlthough mentorship is described extensively in academic medical literature, there are few descriptions of mentorship specific to radiation oncology. The goal of the current study was to investigate the state of mentorship in radiation oncology through a scoping review of the literature.Methods and materialsA search protocol was defined according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. Predefined search terms and medical subject headings were used to search PubMed for English language articles published after January 1, 1990, on mentorship in radiation oncology. Additionally, in-press articles from major radiation oncology and medical education journals were searched. Three reviewers determined article eligibility. Included articles were classified based on predefined evaluation criteria.ResultsFourteen publications from 2008 to 2019 met inclusion criteria. The most commonly described form of mentorship was the dyad (64.3%), followed by team (14.3%) and peer (7.1%); 2 articles did not specify mentorship type (14.3%). The most commonly mentored participants were residents (35.7%), followed by medical students (35.7%) and attendings (21.4%); 1 study included participants of all levels (7.1%). Thirteen studies (92.9%) identified an experimental study design, most of which were cross-sectional (42.9%), followed by cohort studies (28.6%) and before/after (21.4%). Median sample size, reported in 12 of 13 experimental studies, was 132 (coefficient of variation, 1.06). Although outcomes varied widely, the majority described successful implementation of mentorship initiatives with high levels of participant satisfaction.ConclusionsAlthough few initiatives are currently reported, the present study suggests that these initiatives are successful in promoting career development and increasing professional satisfaction. The interventions overwhelmingly described mentorship dyads; other forms of mentorship are either less common or understudied. Limitations included interventions not being evaluated in a controlled setting, and many were assessed using surveys with low response rates. This review highlights rich opportunities for future scholarship to develop, evaluate, and disseminate radiation oncology mentorship initiatives.

Project description:Purpose/objectivesThree-dimensional (3D) printing is recognized as an effective clinical and educational tool in procedurally intensive specialties. However, it has a nascent role in radiation oncology. The goal of this investigation is to clarify the extent to which 3D printing applications are currently being used in radiation oncology through a systematic review of the literature.Materials/methodsA search protocol was defined according to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Included articles were evaluated using parameters of interest including: year and country of publication, experimental design, sample size for clinical studies, radiation oncology topic, reported outcomes, and implementation barriers or safety concerns.ResultsOne hundred and three publications from 2012 to 2019 met inclusion criteria. The most commonly described 3D printing applications included quality assurance phantoms (26%), brachytherapy applicators (20%), bolus (17%), preclinical animal irradiation (10%), compensators (7%), and immobilization devices (5%). Most studies were preclinical feasibility studies (63%), with few clinical investigations such as case reports or series (13%) or cohort studies (11%). The most common applications evaluated within clinical settings included brachytherapy applicators (44%) and bolus (28%). Sample sizes for clinical investigations were small (median 10, range 1-42). A minority of articles described basic or translational research (11%) and workflow or cost evaluation studies (3%). The number of articles increased over time (P < 0.0001). While outcomes were heterogeneous, most studies reported successful implementation of accurate and cost-effective 3D printing methods.ConclusionsThree-dimensional printing is rapidly growing in radiation oncology and has been implemented effectively in a diverse array of applications. Although the number of 3D printing publications has steadily risen, the majority of current reports are preclinical in nature and the few clinical studies that do exist report on small sample sizes. Further dissemination of ongoing investigations describing the clinical application of developed 3D printing technologies in larger cohorts is warranted.

Project description:Purpose Resident physicians use social media (SM) for many reasons. We sought to characterize current SM use by radiation oncology (RO) trainees for education and professional development. Methods and Materials An anonymous 40-question survey was sent by e-mail to RO residents in the 2018 to 2019 academic year. SM platform use, time spent on SM, professional use, and opinions regarding SM use were assessed. Descriptive statistics and a univariate logistic regression analysis were performed to identify factors associated with perceptions of SM and spending >25% of SM time for academic or professional purposes. Results Of the 615 residents surveyed, 149 responded (24% response rate). Facebook (73%), theMednet (62%), Instagram (59%), Twitter (57%), and Doximity (50%) were the top SM platforms used. Most respondents (53%) reported <25% of overall SM time on professional/academic purposes, and 21% reported using SM >60 minutes per day over the past week. Residents with an RO mentor on SM (n = 35; 24%; odds ratio [OR]: 2.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.29-6.08; P = .010), those participating in RO discussions on SM (n = 71; 48%; OR: 2.85; 95% CI, 1.42-5.72; P = .003), and those interacting with professional societies (n = 69; 46%; OR: 7.11; 95% CI, 3.32-15.24; P < .001) were more likely to spend >25% of their SM time on professional/academic purposes. The vast majority of respondents agreed that SM exposed them to novel educational content (82%) and was helpful for career development (65%). In addition, 69% agreed that SM can improve clinical skills and knowledge. A substantial minority agreed that SM distracts them from studying (38%) or they felt pressure to have a SM presence (29%). Conclusions Most RO residents reported that SM provides novel educational content and can help with career development. Potential disadvantages of SM for trainees may include distraction and pressure to maintain a SM presence. SM use by RO trainees merits further research to optimize its potential for education and professional development.

Dataset Information

Literature Review of Vaginal Stenosis and Dilator Use in Radiation Oncology.

Purpose

Methods and materials

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Literature Review of Vaginal Stenosis and Dilator Use in Radiation Oncology.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets