Publications

PURPOSE

In this prospective, longitudinal study, we extend our findings on persistent breast pain in patients (n = 398) following breast cancer surgery and evaluate the prevalence and characteristics of persistent pain in the arm/shoulder. In addition, differences in the severity of common symptoms and quality of life outcomes measured prior to surgery, among the arm pain classes, were evaluated.

METHODS AND SAMPLE

Patients were recruited from Breast Care Centers located in a Comprehensive Cancer Center, two public hospitals, and four community practices. Patients were assessed prior to and monthly for six months following breast cancer surgery.

RESULTS

Using growth mixture modeling, patients were classified into no (41.6%), mild (23.6%), and moderate (34.8%) arm pain classes based on ratings of worst arm/shoulder pain. Compared to the no pain class, patients in the moderate pain class were significantly younger, had a higher body mass index, and were more likely to report preoperative breast pain and swelling in the affected breast. In addition, patients in the moderate pain class reported higher levels of depression, anxiety, and sleep disturbance than the no pain class.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that approximately 35% of women experience persistent levels of moderate arm/shoulder pain in the first six months following breast cancer surgery. Moderate arm/shoulder pain is associated with clinically meaningful decrements in functional status and quality of life.

BACKGROUND

The relationship between cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), left ventricular (LV) lead position, scar, and regional mechanical function influences CRT response.

OBJECTIVE

To determine LV lead position relative to LV structural characteristics in standard clinical practice, we developed and validated a practical yet mathematically rigorous method to register procedural fluoroscopic LV lead position with pre-CRT cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR).

METHODS

After one-time calibration of the standard fluoroscopic suite, we identified the projected CMR LV lead position using three reference landmarks on both CMR and fluoroscopy. This predicted lead position was validated in a canine model by histology and in eight "validation group" patients based on postoperative computed tomography scans (n = 7) or CMR coronary sinus venography (n = 1). The methodology was applied in an additional eight patients with CRT nonresponse and infarction-related myocardial scar.

RESULTS

The projected and actual lead positions were within 1.2 mm in the canine model. The median distance between projected and actual lead positions for the validation group (n = 8) and animal validation case was 11.3 mm (interquartile range 9.2-14.6 mm). In the application (nonresponder) group (n = 8), the lead mapped to the scar periphery in three patients, the core of the scar in one patient, and more than 3 cm from scar in four patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This methodology projects procedural fluoroscopic LV lead position onto pre-CRT CMR using standard fluoroscopic equipment and a one-time calibration, enabling assessment of LV lead position with sufficient accuracy to identify the lead position relative to regional function and infarction-related scar in CRT nonresponders.