Is robotic da Vinci Xi (R) superior to the da Vinci Si (R) for sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision? Outcomes in 150 mid-low rectal cancer patients

The aim of this study was to determine the superiority between the robotic da Vinci Si (R) (Si group) and da Vinci Xi (R) (Xi group) generation in patients with mid-low rectal cancer. Between December 2011 and December 2017, 88 patients with mid-low rectal cancer were operated on using the Si robotic system, from January 2018 to May 2021, 62 more patients with mid-low rectal cancer were operated on using the Xi robotic system. Perioperative and postoperative short-term outcomes were compared between the two groups. Univariate and multivariate Cox-regression analysis were performed to determine factors affecting operating time. A cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis was also performed to determine the learning curve of the primary surgeon. All patients underwent sphincter saving total mesorectal excision (TME). The overall operating time was significantly shorter in the Xi group (181.3 +/- 31.8 min in Si group vs 123.6 +/- 25.7 min in the Xi group, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in terms of conversion rates, mean hospital stays, complications and histopathologic data. CUSUM analysis show completion of learning curve in 44th case of Si group. Univariate and multivariate analysis demonstrated that the learning curve of the primary surgeon (p < 0.001) and the type of robotic system (Xi) are only two factors associated with operating time (OR, 95% CI p; 3.656, 0.665-9.339, p < 0.001). Our study found that the robotic da Vinci Xi systems provide significantly shorter operating time comparing with Si systems, when performing sphincter-preserving TME in mid-low rectal cancer patients. Surgical system (da Vinci Xi) and primary surgeon learning curve are two independent risk factors which associated shortened operating time. Postoperative complication rates and histopathologic outcomes are similar in both groups

Neoadjuvant hyperfractionated-accelerated radiotherapy with concomitant chemotherapy in esophageal cancer: phase II study.

İstanbul Bilim Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi.PURPOSE: Concomitant use of chemotherapy and a radiation dose schedule that is more efficient compared to conventional radiotherapy may provide better outcomes in patients with esophageal cancer. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of neoadjuvant cisplatin-basedchemotherapy and hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy regimen in this group of patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 20 newly diagnosed treatment-naïve esophageal cancer patients were included in the study. Neoadjuvantcisplatin and 5-FU were given with 28-day intervals in a total of three courses. Along with the third course of chemotherapy, hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy (HART) was given with the following dose schedule: 5760 cGy/36 fr/16 day. RESULTS: All patients could receive the planned RT dose of 5760 cGy. Odynophagia was the most frequent grade III acute toxicity (50%). None of the acute toxicity reactions required treatment discontinuation. Grade III or higher subacute/late toxicity occurred in 10 patients (75%) including 5 deaths, mostly esophageal. Radiologically, 8 patients (40%) had complete response, 8 (40%) had partial response, and 3 (15%) had stable disease, with only 1 patient (5%) having progressive disease. Seven patients underwent surgery. Overall, 8 patients (40%) had local control. The 5 years overall survival rate was 38.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy plus chemotherapy may help to target local disease control and increase survival in patients with esophageal cancer. Further studies to improve neoadjuvant and radical chemoradiotherapy dose schedules are warranted for maximum tumor control rates with minimal toxicity

Fourth versus eighth week surgery after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy in T3-4/N0+ rectal cancer: Istanbul R-01 study.

İstanbul Bilim Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi.BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The optimum duration between neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy and transmesorectal excision in locally advancedrectal cancer has not been defined yet. This randomized study was designed to compare the efficacy of four-week versus eight-week delay beforesurgery. METHODS: One-hundred and fifty-three patients with locally advanced low- or mid-rectum rectal adenocarcinoma were included in this single center prospective randomized trial. Patients were assigned to receive surgical treatment after either four weeks or eight weeks of delay afterchemoradiotherapy. Patients were followed for local recurrence and survival, and surgical specimens were examined for pathological staging and circumferential margin positivity. RESULTS: 4-week and 8-week groups did not differ with regard to lateral surgical margin positivity (9.2% vs. 5.1%, P=0.33, respectively), pathological tumor regression rate (P=0.90), overall survival (5-year, 76.5% vs. 74.2%, P=0.60) and local recurrence rate (11.8% vs. 10.3%, 0.77). Overall survival was better in patients with negative surgical margins (78.8% vs. 53.0%, P=0.04). Local recurrence rate was significantly higher among patients with positive surgical margin (28.5% vs. 9.3%, P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Intentional prolongation of the chemoradiotherapy-surgery interval does not seem to improve clinical outcomes of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. Surgical margin positivity seems to be more important with this regard