7 research outputs found

    Morbidity Associated with Colostomy Reversal After Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC

    Get PDF
    ABSTRACT Background. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has improved the survival in selected colorectal cancer patients with peritoneal metastases. In these patients, the risk of a low anastomosis is sometimes diminished through the creation of a colostomy. Currently, the morbidity and mortality associated with the reversal of the colostomy in this population is unknown. Methods. Our study involved two prospectively collected databases including all patients who underwent CRS-HI-PEC. We identified all consecutive patients who had a colostomy and requested a reversal. The associations between four clinical and ten treatment-related factors with the outcome of the reversal procedure were determined by univariate analysis. Results. 21 of 336 patients (6.3 %) with a stoma with a mean age of 50.8 (standard deviation 10.2) years underwent a reversal procedure. One patient was classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade III, 6 as ASA grade II, and the remaining as ASA grade I. Median time elapsed between HIPEC and reversal was 394 days (range 133-1194 days). No life-threatening complications or mortality were observed after reversal. The reversal-related morbidity was 67 %. Infectious complications were observed in 7 patients (33 %). Infectious complications after HIPEC were negatively correlated with the ultimate restoration of bowel continuity (P = 0.05). Bowel continuity was successfully restored in 71 % of the patients. Conclusions. Although the restoration of bowel continuity after CRS-HIPEC was successful in most patients, a relatively high complication rate was observed. Patients with infectious complications after HIPEC have a diminished chance of successful restoration of bowel continuity. Colorectal carcinoma is the third most common cancer worldwide, accounting for approximately 1 million newly diagnosed patients per year and over 600,000 deaths due to this disease. 1 Approximately 10-25 % of colorectal cancer patients develop peritoneal metastases, of whom 25 % present with the peritoneum as the sole site of distant metastases. 2-4 The peritoneum is a thin membrane that covers the abdominal wall and internal organs. 5 Peritoneal metastases are believed to be the result of tumor cell shedding into the peritoneal cavity, either spontaneously or as a result of spill during surgical procedures, ultimately resulting in the development of tumor deposits on the peritoneal surface

    Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) versus endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for resection of non-pedunculated rectal lesions (TRIASSIC study):study protocol of a European multicenter randomised controlled trial

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: In the recent years two innovative approaches have become available for minimally invasive en bloc resections of large non-pedunculated rectal lesions (polyps and early cancers). One is Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery (TAMIS), the other is Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD). Both techniques are standard of care, but a direct randomised comparison is lacking. The choice between either of these procedures is dependent on local expertise or availability rather than evidence-based. The European Society for Endoscopy has recommended that a comparison between ESD and local surgical resection is needed to guide decision making for the optimal approach for the removal of large rectal lesions in Western countries. The aim of this study is to directly compare both procedures in a randomised setting with regard to effectiveness, safety and perceived patient burden. METHODS: Multicenter randomised trial in 15 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients with non-pedunculated lesions > 2 cm, where the bulk of the lesion is below 15 cm from the anal verge, will be randomised between either a TAMIS or an ESD procedure. Lesions judged to be deeply invasive by an expert panel will be excluded. The primary endpoint is the cumulative local recurrence rate at follow-up rectoscopy at 12 months. Secondary endpoints are: 1) Radical (R0-) resection rate; 2) Perceived burden and quality of life; 3) Cost effectiveness at 12 months; 4) Surgical referral rate at 12 months; 5) Complication rate; 6) Local recurrence rate at 6 months. For this non-inferiority trial, the total sample size of 198 is based on an expected local recurrence rate of 3% in the ESD group, 6% in the TAMIS group and considering a difference of less than 6% to be non-inferior. DISCUSSION: This is the first European randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness and safety of TAMIS and ESD for the en bloc resection of large non-pedunculated rectal lesions. This is important as the detection rate of these adenomas is expected to further increase with the introduction of colorectal screening programs throughout Europe. This study will therefore support an optimal use of healthcare resources in the future. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register, NL7083 , 06 July 2018

    Ex Vivo Artifacts and Histopathologic Pitfalls in the Lung

    No full text

    Glucose Transporter 1 (SLC2A1) and Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A (VEGFA) Predict Survival After Resection of Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis

    No full text
    OBJECTIVE: To investigate the individual and combined prognostic value of HIF1α, SLC2A1, and vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGFA) in a multi-institutional cohort of patients with resected colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRCLM). BACKGROUND: In the majority of patients with CRCLM, resection seems not to be curative, despite its curative intent. Overexpression of hypoxia-inducible factor 1α (HIF1α), glucose transporter 1 (SLC2A1; also known as GLUT1), and VEGFA has been associated with tumor progression and poor prognosis of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: Tissue microarrays were generated using CRCLM and patient-matched primary CRC from patients who underwent CRCLM resection between 1990 and 2010. Prognostic value of HIF1α, SLC2A1, and VEGFA was determined by immunohistochemistry. A 500-fold cross-validated hazard rate ratio (HRRav) for overall survival was calculated. RESULTS: HIF1α, SLC2A1, and VEGFA expression could be evaluated in 328, 350, and 335 patients, respectively. High SLC2A1 expression was associated with good prognosis (HRRav, 0.67; P (HRR >1)  1)  < 0.01 and HRRav, 1.50; P (HRR < 1)  = 0.02, respectively). SLC2A1 showed prognostic value particularly in patients treated with systemic therapy (P < 0.01), whereas the prognostic value of VEGFA expression was mainly observed in patients not treated with systemic therapy (P < 0.01). Prognosis was especially poor in patients with both low SLC2A1 and high VEGFA expression (P < 0.01). HIF1α expression was not associated with survival. CONCLUSIONS: SLC2A1 and VEGFA expression are prognostic molecular biomarkers for patients with CRCLM with added value to established clinicopathological variables
    corecore