Solitary colon metastasis from renal cell carcinoma nine years after nephrectomy: A case report

AbstractIntroductionRenal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the most common renal malignancy in adults. Metastatic disease is relatively common at presentation and frequently involves the lung, bone, brain, liver and adrenal glands. After curative resection, there is a 30–40% risk of recurrence, and a 10% risk of developing metastatic disease after 5 years. The gastrointestinal tract, particularly the colon, represents a very uncommon site of late metastatic disease.Presentation of CaseWe present a case of a 67 year-old-male who underwent a left radical nephrectomy for RCC 9 years before presenting with a metastatic large bowel obstruction. He was later found to have a near-completely obstructing mass in the rectosigmoid colon and underwent a sigmoidectomy with anterior resection of the upper rectum. Histopathology confirmed metastatic RCC confined to the colonic wall with negative microscopic margins.DiscussionThe tendency of RCC to metastasize to unusual sites such as the pancreas or thyroid gland has been widely reported. However, cases of colon metastasis from RCC are extremely rare. Despite the absence of randomized prospective data, widespread consensus supports the surgical treatment of solitary and oligometastatic disease in light of the poor patient outcomes in non-surgically treated disease (Milovic et al., 2013) [3]. Multiple groups have reported favorable outcomes for surgically resected solitary metastatic disease with long disease-free intervals and good performance status.ConclusionThe colon is a potential, though uncommon, site for solitary metastasis from RCC. The clinical presentation is frequently several years after initial curative resection. Oncologic resection with negative margins may result in long-term survival in patients with isolated metastatic disease

Oxaliplatin but Not Irinotecan Impairs Posthepatectomy Liver Regeneration in a Murine Model

Introduction. We examined the murine hepatectomy model of liver regeneration (LR) in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Methods. C57BL/6 mice were randomized to receive neoadjuvant intraperitoneal (IP) injections of a control, oxaliplatin (15 mg/kg), or irinotecan (100 mg/Kg or 250 mg/Kg) solution. Hepatectomy (70%) was performed 14 days after the final IP treatment. Animals were sacrificed at postoperative day (D) 0, 1, 2, 3, and 7. Liver remnants and serum were collected for analysis. T-tests for independent samples were used for statistical comparisons. Results. For oxaliplatin, percent LR did not differ at D1 or D2 but was significantly less at D3 (89.0% versus 70.0%, P = 0.048) with no difference on D7 (P = 0.21). Irinotecan-treated mice at both dose levels (100 mg/Kg and 250 mg/Kg) showed no significant differences in LR. BrdU incorporation was significantly decreased in oxaliplatin-treated animals (D1,2,3). Conclusions. Neoadjuvant oxaliplatin but not irinotecan impairs early LR in a posthepatectomy murine model which correlates with decreased DNA synthesis

Routine nasogastric suction may be unnecessary after a pancreatic resection

AbstractBackgroundMost surgeons routinely place a nasogastric tube at the time of a pancreatic resection. The goal of the present study was to evaluate the outcome when a pancreatic resection is performed without routine post-operative nasogastric suction.MethodsOne hundred consecutive patients underwent a pancreatic resection (64a pancreaticoduodenectomy, 98% pylorus sparing and 36a distal pancreatectomy). In the first cohort (50 patients), a nasogastric tube was routinely placed at the time of surgery and in the second cohort (50 patients) the nasogastric was removed in the operating room. Outcomes for these two cohorts were recorded in a prospective database and compared using the χ2 or Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon's rank-sum test.ResultsDemographical, surgical and pathological details were similar between the two cohorts. A post-operative complication occurred in 22 (44%) in each group (P= 1.000). There were no statistically significant differences in the frequency or severity of complications, or length of stay between groups. The spectrum of complications experienced by the two cohorts was similar including complications that could potentially be related to the use of nasogastric suction such as delayed gastric emptying, anastomotic leak, wound dehiscence and pneumonia. There was no difference between the two groups in the number of patients who required post-operative nasogastric tube placement (or replacement) [2 (4%) vs. 4 (8%), P= 0.678].ConclusionIt may be safe to place a nasogastric tube post-operatively in a minority of patients after a pancreatic resection and spare the majority the discomfort associated with routine post-operative nasogastric suction

Improved Survival with Adjuvant External-Beam Radiation Therapy in Lymph Node-Negative Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND. Although chemoradiation often is administered as an adjuvant to pancreatic cancer surgery, recent reports have disputed the benefit of radiation therapy. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of adjuvant radiation therapy in patients with locally confined, lymph node-negative (N0) pancreatic cancer. METHODS. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry was used to identify patients who had undergone cancer-directed surgery for N0 pancreatic adenocarcinoma between 1988 and 2003. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed to compare overall survival between patients who did and did not receive adjuvant external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT). Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to determine the prognostic significance of EBRT when additional clinicopathologic factors were assessed. The analysis also examined the potential treatment selection bias of patients with survival \u3c3 months. RESULTS. A cohort of 1930 surgical patients with N0 disease was identified. The median survival was 17 months. Irradiated patients had significantly better survival compared with nonirradiated patients (20 months vs 15 months, respectively; P \u3c .001). On multivariate analysis, adjuvant EBRT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.63–0.82; P \u3c .001), age, grade, tumor classification, and tumor location were independent predictors of survival. When patients with survival \u3c3 months were excluded from the analysis, no difference in survival between the EBRT group and the nonradiation group was noted on univariate comparison (P value not significant). However, on multivariate analysis, EBRT remained an independent predictor of improved overall survival (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.75–1.00; P= .044). CONCLUSIONS. Adjuvant EBRT was associated with improved survival in patients with operable, N0 pancreatic cancer. Its use should be considered in patients who have early-stage N0 disease. Cancer 2008. © 2007 American Cancer Society

Improved Survival with Adjuvant External-Beam Radiation Therapy in Lymph Node-Negative Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND. Although chemoradiation often is administered as an adjuvant to pancreatic cancer surgery, recent reports have disputed the benefit of radiation therapy. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of adjuvant radiation therapy in patients with locally confined, lymph node-negative (N0) pancreatic cancer. METHODS. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry was used to identify patients who had undergone cancer-directed surgery for N0 pancreatic adenocarcinoma between 1988 and 2003. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed to compare overall survival between patients who did and did not receive adjuvant external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT). Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to determine the prognostic significance of EBRT when additional clinicopathologic factors were assessed. The analysis also examined the potential treatment selection bias of patients with survival \u3c3 months. RESULTS. A cohort of 1930 surgical patients with N0 disease was identified. The median survival was 17 months. Irradiated patients had significantly better survival compared with nonirradiated patients (20 months vs 15 months, respectively; P \u3c .001). On multivariate analysis, adjuvant EBRT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.63–0.82; P \u3c .001), age, grade, tumor classification, and tumor location were independent predictors of survival. When patients with survival \u3c3 months were excluded from the analysis, no difference in survival between the EBRT group and the nonradiation group was noted on univariate comparison (P value not significant). However, on multivariate analysis, EBRT remained an independent predictor of improved overall survival (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.75–1.00; P= .044). CONCLUSIONS. Adjuvant EBRT was associated with improved survival in patients with operable, N0 pancreatic cancer. Its use should be considered in patients who have early-stage N0 disease. Cancer 2008. © 2007 American Cancer Society

The Impact of Lymph Node Number on Survival in Patients With Lymph Node-Negative Pancreatic Cancer

Objectives: The role of lymph node (LN) dissection for pancreatic cancer remains uncertain, and guidelines for a minimum LN number have not been established. We hypothesized that LN number in node-negative (N0) pancreatic cancer influences survival.Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was queried for patients undergoing resection for N0 pancreatic adenocarcinoma between 1988 and 2003. Lymph node number was categorized as 1-10, 11-20, and \u3e20.Results: In a cohort of 1915 patients, the median LN number was 7 (range 1-57); 1365 (71%) patients had \u3c11 LN. Survival was significantly better in the 11 to 20 compared with the 1-10 group (median, 20 vs 15 months, respectively, P \u3c 0.0001); no difference was observed between the 11-20 and \u3e20 groups (median, 20 vs 23 months, respectively, P = 0.14). Multivariate analysis demonstrated the prognostic significance of LN number for determining overall survival (hazard ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval: 0.97-0.99; P\u3c0.0001).Conclusions: Pancreatic cancer lymphadenectomy with examination of \u3e10 LN is associated with improved survival in N0 disease and should be considered a benchmark for adequacy of surgery and/or pathology. Currently, only a minority of patients are assessed by this measure. The variation in LN number may be indicative of diverse surgical technique and/or pathologic analysis and warrants further investigation

The Impact of Lymph Node Number on Survival in Patients With Lymph Node-Negative Pancreatic Cancer

Objectives: The role of lymph node (LN) dissection for pancreatic cancer remains uncertain, and guidelines for a minimum LN number have not been established. We hypothesized that LN number in node-negative (N0) pancreatic cancer influences survival.Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was queried for patients undergoing resection for N0 pancreatic adenocarcinoma between 1988 and 2003. Lymph node number was categorized as 1-10, 11-20, and \u3e20.Results: In a cohort of 1915 patients, the median LN number was 7 (range 1-57); 1365 (71%) patients had \u3c11 LN. Survival was significantly better in the 11 to 20 compared with the 1-10 group (median, 20 vs 15 months, respectively, P \u3c 0.0001); no difference was observed between the 11-20 and \u3e20 groups (median, 20 vs 23 months, respectively, P = 0.14). Multivariate analysis demonstrated the prognostic significance of LN number for determining overall survival (hazard ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval: 0.97-0.99; P\u3c0.0001).Conclusions: Pancreatic cancer lymphadenectomy with examination of \u3e10 LN is associated with improved survival in N0 disease and should be considered a benchmark for adequacy of surgery and/or pathology. Currently, only a minority of patients are assessed by this measure. The variation in LN number may be indicative of diverse surgical technique and/or pathologic analysis and warrants further investigation