69 research outputs found

    Proper P-compatible hypersubstitutions

    Get PDF

    Risk for pelvic metastasis and role of pelvic lymphadenectomy in node-positive vulvar cancer - results from the AGO-VOP.2 QS vulva study

    Get PDF
    Simple Summary In node-positive vulvar squamous cell cancer, questions of when and how to perform pelvic lymphadenectomy (LAE) as well as the optimal extent of pelvic treatment in general have been surrounded by considerable controversy. In Germany, systematic pelvic LAE is currently recommended as a staging procedure in patients at risk for pelvic nodal involvement in order to prevent morbidity caused by pelvic radiotherapy (RT) in patients without histologically-confirmed pelvic involvement. However, the population at risk for pelvic metastases remains insufficiently described, resulting in the potential overtreatment of a considerable proportion of patients with groin-positive disease. This applies to the indication to perform surgical staging but also to adjuvant RT of the pelvis without previous pelvic staging. Our study aims to describe the risk for pelvic lymph node metastasis with regard to positive groin nodes and to clarify the indication criteria for pelvic treatment in node-positive vulvar cancer. Abstract The need for pelvic treatment in patients with node-positive vulvar cancer (VSCC) and the value of pelvic lymphadenectomy (LAE) as a staging procedure to plan adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) is controversial. In this retrospective, multicenter analysis, 306 patients with primary node-positive VSCC treated at 33 gynecologic oncology centers in Germany between 2017 and 2019 were analyzed. All patients received surgical staging of the groins; nodal status was as follows: 23.9% (73/306) pN1a, 23.5% (72/306) pN1b, 20.4% (62/306) pN2a/b, and 31.9% (97/306) pN2c/pN3. A total of 35.6% (109/306) received pelvic LAE; pelvic nodal involvement was observed in 18.5%. None of the patients with nodal status pN1a or pN1b and pelvic LAE showed pelvic nodal involvement. Taking only patients with nodal status ≥pN2a into account, the rate of pelvic involvement was 25%. In total, adjuvant RT was applied in 64.4% (197/306). Only half of the pelvic node-positive (N+) patients received adjuvant RT to the pelvis (50%, 10/20 patients); 41.9% (122/291 patients) experienced recurrent disease or died. In patients with histologically-confirmed pelvic metastases after LAE, distant recurrences were most frequently observed (7/20 recurrences). Conclusions: A relevant risk regarding pelvic nodal involvement was observed from nodal status pN2a and higher. Our data support the omission of pelvic treatment in patients with nodal status pN1a and pN1b

    E-AHPBA-ESSO-ESSR Innsbruck consensus guidelines for preoperative liver function assessment before hepatectomy

    Get PDF
    Background Posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) contributes significantly to morbidity and mortality after liver surgery. Standardized assessment of preoperative liver function is crucial to identify patients at risk. These European consensus guidelines provide guidance for preoperative patient assessment. Methods A modified Delphi approach was used to achieve consensus. The expert panel consisted of hepatobiliary surgeons, radiologists, nuclear medicine specialists, and hepatologists. The guideline process was supervised by a methodologist and reviewed by a patient representative. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane library, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry. Evidence assessment and statement development followed Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology. Results Based on 271 publications covering 4 key areas, 21 statements (at least 85 per cent agreement) were produced (median level of evidence 2− to 2+). Only a few systematic reviews (2++) and one RCT (1+) were identified. Preoperative liver function assessment should be considered before complex resections, and in patients with suspected or known underlying liver disease, or chemotherapy-associated or drug-induced liver injury. Clinical assessment and blood-based scores reflecting liver function or portal hypertension (for example albumin/bilirubin, platelet count) aid in identifying risk of PHLF. Volumetry of the future liver remnant represents the foundation for assessment, and can be combined with indocyanine green clearance or LiMAx® according to local expertise and availability. Functional MRI and liver scintigraphy are alternatives, combining FLR volume and function in one examination. Conclusion These guidelines reflect established methods to assess preoperative liver function and PHLF risk, and have uncovered evidence gaps of interest for future research.publishedVersio

    Universal algebra and applications in theoretical computer science/ Denecke

    No full text
    xii, 383 hal.: ill.; 21 cm

    Universal algebra and applications in theoretical computer science/ Denecke

    No full text
    xii, 383 hal.: ill.; 21 cm
    • …
    corecore