Impact of microsatellite status in early-onset colonic cancer

Background The molecular profile of early-onset colonic cancer is undefined. This study evaluated clinicopathological features and oncological outcomes of young patients with colonic cancer according to microsatellite status. Methods Anonymized data from an international collaboration were analysed. Criteria for inclusion were patients younger than 50 years diagnosed with stage I-III colonic cancer that was surgically resected. Clinicopathological features, microsatellite status, and disease-specific outcomes were evaluated. Results A total of 650 patients fulfilled the criteria for inclusion. Microsatellite instability (MSI) was identified in 170 (26.2 per cent), whereas 480 had microsatellite-stable (MSS) tumours (relative risk of MSI 2.5 compared with older patients). MSI was associated with a family history of colorectal cancer and lesions in the proximal colon. The proportions with pathological node-positive disease (45.9 versus 45.6 per cent; P = 1.000) and tumour budding (20.3 versus 20.5 per cent; P = 1.000) were similar in the two groups. Patients with MSI tumours were more likely to have BRAF (22.5 versus 6.9 per cent; P < 0.001) and KRAS (40.0 versus 24.2 per cent; P = 0.006) mutations, and a hereditary cancer syndrome (30.0 versus 5.0 per cent; P < 0.001; relative risk 6). Five-year disease-free survival rates in the MSI group were 95.0, 92.0, and 80.0 per cent for patients with stage I, II, and III tumours, compared with 88.0, 88.0, and 65.0 per cent in the MSS group (P = 0.753, P = 0.487, and P = 0.105 respectively). Conclusion Patients with early-onset colonic cancer have a high risk of MSI and defined genetic conditions. Those with MSI tumours have more adverse pathology (budding, KRAS/BRAF mutations, and nodal metastases) than older patients with MSI cancers. Data on 650 patients aged less than 50 years diagnosed with stage I-III colonic cancer and undergoing surgery with curative intent were collected, and the impact of microsatellite instability (MSI) on clinicopathological features and disease-specific outcomes was assessed. Patients with early-onset disease had a high risk of MSI and defined genetic conditions. Those with MSI tumours had more adverse pathology (budding, KRAS/BRAF mutations, and nodal metastases) than older patients with MSI cancers

Post-Operative Functional Outcomes in Early Age Onset Rectal Cancer

Background: Impairment of bowel, urogenital and fertility-related function in patients treated for rectal cancer is common. While the rate of rectal cancer in the young (&lt;50 years) is rising, there is little data on functional outcomes in this group. Methods: The REACCT international collaborative database was reviewed and data on eligible patients analysed. Inclusion criteria comprised patients with a histologically confirmed rectal cancer, &lt;50 years of age at time of diagnosis and with documented follow-up including functional outcomes. Results: A total of 1428 (n=1428) patients met the eligibility criteria and were included in the final analysis. Metastatic disease was present at diagnosis in 13%. Of these, 40% received neoadjuvant therapy and 50% adjuvant chemotherapy. The incidence of post-operative major morbidity was 10%. A defunctioning stoma was placed for 621 patients (43%); 534 of these proceeded to elective restoration of bowel continuity. The median follow-up time was 42 months. Of this cohort, a total of 415 (29%) reported persistent impairment of functional outcomes, the most frequent of which was bowel dysfunction (16%), followed by bladder dysfunction (7%), sexual dysfunction (4.5%) and infertility (1%). Conclusion: A substantial proportion of patients with early-onset rectal cancer who undergo surgery report persistent impairment of functional status. Patients should be involved in the discussion regarding their treatment options and potential impact on quality of life. Functional outcomes should be routinely recorded as part of follow up alongside oncological parameters

Incisional hernia after liver transplantation: mesh-based repair and what else?

Purpose!#!Incisional hernia (IH) is not uncommon after liver transplantation (LT). We investigated the long-term outcome of mesh-based hernia repair using an inlay-onlay technique.!##!Methods!#!Our analysis was based on a prospective collected database of all LT recipients from our hospital over a period of 15 years. We analyzed clinical data including the period between LT and hernia development, the size and localization of the hernia, the length of in-hospital stay, immunosuppression, and postoperative morbidity, as well as follow-up data. The median follow-up period was 120 (range 12-200) months.!##!Results!#!Among a total of 220 patients who underwent a collective 239 LTs, 29 (13%) were found to have an IH after a median period of 27.5 months (range 3-96 months). There were 12 (41%) men and 17 (59%) women, with a median age of 51 years. The median size of the IH was 13 cm (range 2-30 cm) and the median in-hospital stay was 6 days. Mild postoperative complications developed in seven patients, including two onlay mesh infections. One patient (3.4%) suffered recurrence.!##!Conclusion!#!Mesh-based hernia repair using the inlay/onlay technique represents an effective and safe method for patients with an IH after LT, without additional risk from continuous immunosuppression

The LiMAx Test as Selection Criteria in Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery

Background: Liver failure is a crucial predictor for relevant morbidity and mortality after hepatic surgery. Hence, a good patient selection is mandatory. We use the LiMAx test for patient selection for major or minor liver resections in robotic and laparoscopic liver surgery and share our experience here. Patients and methods: We identified patients in the Magdeburg registry of minimally invasive liver surgery (MD-MILS) who underwent robotic or laparoscopic minor or major liver surgery and received a LiMAx test for preoperative evaluation of the liver function. This cohort was divided in two groups: patients with normal (LiMAx normal) and decreased (LiMAx decreased) liver function measured by the LiMAx test. Results: Forty patients were selected from the MD-MILS regarding the selection criteria (LiMAx normal, n = 22 and LiMAx decreased, n = 18). Significantly more major liver resections were performed in the LiMAx normal vs. the LiMAx decreased group (13 vs. 2; p = 0.003). Hence, the mean operation time was significantly longer in the LiMAx normal vs. the LiMAx decreased group (356.6 vs. 228.1 min; p = 0.003) and the intraoperative blood transfusion significantly higher in the LiMAx normal vs. the LiMAx decreased group (8 vs. 1; p = 0.027). There was no significant difference between the LiMAx groups regarding the length of hospital stay, intraoperative blood loss, liver surgery related morbidity or mortality, and resection margin status. Conclusion: The LiMAx test is a helpful and reliable tool to precisely determine the liver function capacity. It aids in accurate patient selection for major or minor liver resections in minimally invasive liver surgery, which consequently serves to improve patients&rsquo; safety. In this way, liver resections can be performed safely, even in patients with reduced liver function, without negatively affecting morbidity, mortality and the resection margin status, which is an important predictive oncological factor

Three-Device (3D) Technique for Liver Parenchyma Dissection in Robotic Liver Surgery

Background: The implementation of robotics in liver surgery offers several advantages compared to conventional open and laparoscopic techniques. One major advantage is the enhanced degree of freedom at the tip of the robotic tools compared to laparoscopic instruments. This enables excellent vessel control during inflow and outflow dissection of the liver. Parenchymal transection remains the most challenging part during robotic liver resection because currently available robotic instruments for parenchymal transection have several limitations and there is no standardized technique as of yet. We established a new strategy and share our experience. Methods: We present a novel technique for the transection of liver parenchyma during robotic surgery, using three devices (3D) simultaneously: monopolar scissors and bipolar Maryland forceps of the robot and laparoscopic-guided waterjet. We collected the perioperative data of twenty-eight patients who underwent this procedure for minor and major liver resections between February 2019 and December 2020 from the Magdeburg Registry of minimally invasive liver surgery (MD-MILS). Results: Twenty-eight patients underwent robotic-assisted 3D parenchyma dissection within the investigation period. Twelve cases of major and sixteen cases of minor hepatectomy for malignant and non-malignant cases were performed. Operative time for major liver resections (&ge; 3 liver segments) was 381.7 (SD 80.6) min vs. 252.0 (70.4) min for minor resections (p &lt; 0.01). Intraoperative measured blood loss was 495.8 (SD 508.8) ml for major and 256.3 (170.2) ml for minor liver resections (p = 0.090). The mean postoperative stay was 13.3 (SD 11.1) days for all cases. Liver surgery-related morbidity was 10.7%, no mortalities occurred. We achieved an R0 resection in all malignant cases. Conclusions: The 3D technique for parenchyma dissection in robotic liver surgery is a safe and feasible procedure. This novel method offers an advanced locally controlled preparation of intrahepatic vessels and bile ducts. The combination of precise extrahepatic vessel handling with the 3D technique of parenchyma dissection is a fundamental step forward to the standardization of robotic liver surgery for teaching purposing and the wider adoption of robotic hepatectomy into routine patient care

Does Robotic Liver Surgery Enhance R0 Results in Liver Malignancies during Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery?&mdash;A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Robotic procedures are an integral part of modern liver surgery. However, the advantages of a robotic approach in comparison to the conventional laparoscopic approach are the subject of controversial debate. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare robotic and laparoscopic liver resection with particular attention to the resection margin status in malignant cases. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed and Cochrane Library in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Only studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic liver resections were considered for this meta-analysis. Furthermore, the rate of the positive resection margin or R0 rate in malignant cases had to be clearly identifiable. We used fixed or random effects models according to heterogeneity. Results: Fourteen studies with a total number of 1530 cases were included in qualitative and quantitative synthesis. Malignancies were identified in 71.1% (n = 1088) of these cases. These included hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma, colorectal liver metastases and other malignancies of the liver. Positive resection margins were noted in 24 cases (5.3%) in the robotic group and in 54 cases (8.6%) in the laparoscopic group (OR = 0.71; 95% CI (0.42&ndash;1.18); p = 0.18). Tumor size was significantly larger in the robotic group (MD = 6.92; 95% CI (2.93&ndash;10.91); p = 0.0007). The operation time was significantly longer in the robotic procedure (MD = 28.12; 95% CI (3.66&ndash;52.57); p = 0.02). There were no significant differences between the robotic and laparoscopic approaches regarding the intra-operative blood loss, length of hospital stay, overall and severe complications and conversion rate. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis showed no significant difference between the robotic and laparoscopic procedures regarding the resection margin status. Tumor size was significantly larger in the robotic group. However, randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up are needed to demonstrate the benefits of robotics in liver surgery

Large-Vessel Giant Cell Arteritis following COVID-19&mdash;What Can HLA Typing Reveal?

Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is an immune-mediated vasculitis that affects large arteries. It has been hypothesized that viruses may trigger inflammation within the vessel walls. Genetic studies on human leukocyte antigens (HLAs) have previously reported HLA-DRB1*04 as a susceptible allele for GCA and HLA-DRB1*15 as a protective allele for GCA. Here, we discuss the clinical presentation, laboratory findings, HLA class I and class II analysis results, and management of patients with extracranial large-vessel (LV) GCA, detected at least six weeks after recovery from COVID-19. This case series encompassed three patients with LV-GCA (two males and a female with an age range of 63&ndash;69 years) whose leading clinical presentation included the presence of constitutional symptoms and significantly elevated inflammatory markers. The diagnosis of LV-GCA was confirmed by CT angiography and FDG-PET/CT, revealing inflammation in the large vessels. All were treated with corticosteroids, while two received adjunctive therapy. By analyzing HLA profiles, we found no presence of the susceptible HLA-DRB1*04 allele, while the HLA-DRB1*15 allele was detected in two patients. In conclusion, LV-GCA may be triggered by COVID-19. We highlight the importance of the early identification of LV-GCA following SARS-CoV-2 infection, which may be delayed due to the overlapping clinical features of GCA and COVID-19. The prompt initiation of therapy is necessary in order to avoid severe vascular complications. Future studies will better define the role of specific HLA alleles in patients who developed GCA following COVID-19

Large-Vessel Giant Cell Arteritis following COVID-19—What Can HLA Typing Reveal?

Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is an immune-mediated vasculitis that affects large arteries. It has been hypothesized that viruses may trigger inflammation within the vessel walls. Genetic studies on human leukocyte antigens (HLAs) have previously reported HLA-DRB1*04 as a susceptible allele for GCA and HLA-DRB1*15 as a protective allele for GCA. Here, we discuss the clinical presentation, laboratory findings, HLA class I and class II analysis results, and management of patients with extracranial large-vessel (LV) GCA, detected at least six weeks after recovery from COVID-19. This case series encompassed three patients with LV-GCA (two males and a female with an age range of 63–69 years) whose leading clinical presentation included the presence of constitutional symptoms and significantly elevated inflammatory markers. The diagnosis of LV-GCA was confirmed by CT angiography and FDG-PET/CT, revealing inflammation in the large vessels. All were treated with corticosteroids, while two received adjunctive therapy. By analyzing HLA profiles, we found no presence of the susceptible HLA-DRB1*04 allele, while the HLA-DRB1*15 allele was detected in two patients. In conclusion, LV-GCA may be triggered by COVID-19. We highlight the importance of the early identification of LV-GCA following SARS-CoV-2 infection, which may be delayed due to the overlapping clinical features of GCA and COVID-19. The prompt initiation of therapy is necessary in order to avoid severe vascular complications. Future studies will better define the role of specific HLA alleles in patients who developed GCA following COVID-19