Création d'une unité neurovasculaire aiguë au CHU de Reims : principes de fonctionnement et évaluation à un an de l'ouverture

REIMS-BU Santé (514542104) / SudocPARIS-BIUM (751062103) / SudocSudocFranceF

High Risk of Anal and Rectal Cancer in Patients With Anal and/or Perianal Crohn’s Disease

International audienceBackground & AimsLittle is known about the magnitude of the risk of anal and rectal cancer in patients with anal and/or perineal Crohn’s disease. We aimed to assess the risk of anal and rectal cancer in patients with Crohn’s perianal disease followed up in the Cancers Et Surrisque Associé aux Maladies Inflammatoires Intestinales En France (CESAME) cohort.MethodsWe collected data from 19,486 patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) enrolled in the observational CESAME study in France, from May 2004 through June 2005; 14.9% of participants had past or current anal and/or perianal Crohn’s disease. Subjects were followed up for a median time of 35 months (interquartile range, 29–40 mo). To identify risk factors for anal cancer in the total CESAME population, we performed a case-control study in which participants were matched for age and sex.ResultsAmong the total IBD population, 8 patients developed anal cancer and 14 patients developed rectal cancer. In the subgroup of 2911 patients with past or current anal and/or perianal Crohn’s lesions at cohort entry, 2 developed anal squamous-cell carcinoma, 3 developed perianal fistula–related adenocarcinoma, and 6 developed rectal cancer. The corresponding incidence rates were 0.26 per 1000 patient-years for anal squamous-cell carcinoma, 0.38 per 1000 patient-years for perianal fistula–related adenocarcinoma, and 0.77 per 1000 patient-years for rectal cancer. Among the 16,575 patients with ulcerative colitis or Crohn’s disease without anal or perianal lesions, the incidence rate of anal cancer was 0.08 per 1000 patient-years and of rectal cancer was 0.21 per 1000 patient-years. Among factors tested by univariate conditional regression (IBD subtype, disease duration, exposure to immune-suppressive therapy, presence of past or current anal and/or perianal lesions), the presence of past or current anal and/or perianal lesions at cohort entry was the only factor significantly associated with development of anal cancer (odds ratio, 11.2; 95% CI, 1.18-551.51; P = .03).ConclusionsIn an analysis of data from the CESAME cohort in France, patients with anal and/or perianal Crohn’s disease have a high risk of anal cancer, including perianal fistula–related cancer, and a high risk of rectal cancer

Effect of general anaesthesia on functional outcome in patients with anterior circulation ischaemic stroke having endovascular thrombectomy versus standard care: a meta-analysis of individual patient data

Background: General anaesthesia (GA) during endovascular thrombectomy has been associated with worse patient outcomes in observational studies compared with patients treated without GA. We assessed functional outcome in ischaemic stroke patients with large vessel anterior circulation occlusion undergoing endovascular thrombectomy under GA, versus thrombectomy not under GA (with or without sedation) versus standard care (ie, no thrombectomy), stratified by the use of GA versus standard care. Methods: For this meta-analysis, patient-level data were pooled from all patients included in randomised trials in PuMed published between Jan 1, 2010, and May 31, 2017, that compared endovascular thrombectomy predominantly done with stent retrievers with standard care in anterior circulation ischaemic stroke patients (HERMES Collaboration). The primary outcome was functional outcome assessed by ordinal analysis of the modified Rankin scale (mRS) at 90 days in the GA and non-GA subgroups of patients treated with endovascular therapy versus those patients treated with standard care, adjusted for baseline prognostic variables. To account for between-trial variance we used mixed-effects modelling with a random effect for trials incorporated in all models. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane method. The meta-analysis was prospectively designed, but not registered. Findings: Seven trials were identified by our search; of 1764 patients included in these trials, 871 were allocated to endovascular thrombectomy and 893 were assigned standard care. After exclusion of 74 patients (72 did not undergo the procedure and two had missing data on anaesthetic strategy), 236 (30%) of 797 patients who had endovascular procedures were treated under GA. At baseline, patients receiving GA were younger and had a shorter delay between stroke onset and randomisation but they had similar pre-treatment clinical severity compared with patients who did not have GA. Endovascular thrombectomy improved functional outcome at 3 months both in patients who had GA (adjusted common odds ratio (cOR) 1·52, 95% CI 1·09–2·11, p=0·014) and in those who did not have GA (adjusted cOR 2·33, 95% CI 1·75–3·10, p<0·0001) versus standard care. However, outcomes were significantly better for patients who did not receive GA versus those who received GA (covariate-adjusted cOR 1·53, 95% CI 1·14–2·04, p=0·0044). The risk of bias and variability between studies was assessed to be low. Interpretation: Worse outcomes after endovascular thrombectomy were associated with GA, after adjustment for baseline prognostic variables. These data support avoidance of GA whenever possible. The procedure did, however, remain effective versus standard care in patients treated under GA, indicating that treatment should not be withheld in those who require anaesthesia for medical reasons