Insertion of permanent pacemakers as a day case procedure.

Abstract

treated with neutrons and photons.2 Results were significantly better, however, for neutron than photon treatment in node positive patients, but worse in node negative patients with the suggestion that these were caused by inadequate planning because of the fixed neutron beams. No opposition was expressed to continued trials now under way. The discontinuation of funding suggested by Dr Tobias refers to that of new cyclotrons rather than of existing units.The arguments against neutrons have been well rehearsed. We still do not have clear cut answers. The proposed unit at St Thomas's would be for not only neutron therapy but also particle treatment of eye tumours and nuclide production for positron emission tomography. Cancer therapy depends on adequate planning of treatment obtainable only with the newer high energy neutrons. The earlier work at Hammersmith using fixed horizontal beams was a remarkable achievement, whatever the final value of neutron therapy.The

Permanent Pacemaker and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Implantation

“…22,23 Concerns about potential complications continue to be expressed. [24][25][26] Questions about lead selection, the timing of discharge, and the intensity of follow-up are frequently raised. In addition, the economic impact has yet to be fully appreciated.…”