Molecular and life-history effects of a natural toxin on herbivorous and non-target soil arthropods

Natural toxins, such as isothiocyanate (ITC), are harmful secondary metabolites produced by plants. Many natural toxins occur in commercial crops, yet their possible negative repercussions on especially non-target soil organisms are largely unknown. This study examined life-history and gene transcriptional responses to 2-phenylethyl ITC on two soil arthropod species: Folsomia candida and Protaphorura fimata. To that end the standardized ISO guideline for ecotoxicological tests and a microarray for F. candida were used. The dissipation of 2-phenylethyl ITC in natural soil was investigated using GC-MS/MS for quantification. Half-lives, tested at four concentration levels in natural soil, were on average 16 h with biodegradation as the plausible main removal process. Regardless, toxic effects on reproduction were shown for F. candida and P. fimata, with EC50 values of around 11.5 nmol/g soil illustrating the toxic character of this compound. Gene expression profiles revealed the importance of fatty acid metabolism at low exposure concentrations (EC10), which is associated with the lipophilic nature of 2-phenylethyl ITC. At higher concentrations (EC50) gene expression became more ubiquitous with over-expression of especially stress-related genes and sugar metabolism. The regulation of a gene encoding a precursor of follistatin, furthermore, implied the inhibition of reproduction and may be an important molecular target that can be linked to the observed adverse effect of life-history traits

The risk factors and predictive factors for anastomotic leakage after resection for colorectal cancer: reappraisal of the literature

Anastomotic leakage is a serious complication that can occur after colorectal surgery. Several risk factors for anastomotic leakage have been reported based on the findings of prospective and retrospective studies, including patient characteristics, the use of neoadjuvant therapy, the tumor location, intraoperative events, etc. However, as these risk factors affect each other, the statistical results have differed in each study. In addition, differences in surgical methods, including laparoscopy versus laparotomy or stapling anastomosis versus handsewn anastomosis, may influence the incidence of anastomotic leakage. This mini-review summarizes the results of reported papers to clarify the current evidence of risk factors for anastomotic leakage

Laparoscopic extraperitoneal rectal cancer surgery: the clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES)

BACKGROUND: The laparoscopic approach is increasingly applied in colorectal surgery. Although laparoscopic surgery in colon cancer has been proved to be safe and feasible with equivalent long-term oncological outcome compared to open surgery, safety and long-term oncological outcome of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer remain controversial. Laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery might be efficacious, but indications and limitations are not clearly defined. Therefore, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) has developed this clinical practice guideline. METHODS: An international expert panel was invited to appraise the current literature and to develop evidence-based recommendations. The expert panel constituted for a consensus development conference in May 2010. Thereafter, the recommendations were presented at the annual congress of the EAES in Geneva in June 2010 in a plenary session. A second consensus process (Delphi process) of the recommendations with the explanatory text was necessary due to the changes after the consensus conference. RESULTS: Laparoscopic surgery for extraperitoneal (mid- and low-) rectal cancer is feasible and widely accepted. The laparoscopic approach must offer the same quality of surgical specimen as in open surgery. Short-term outcomes such as bowel function, surgical-site infections, pain and hospital stay are slightly improved with the laparoscopic approach. Laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer is not inferior to the open in terms of disease-free survival, overall survival or local recurrence. Laparoscopic pelvic dissection may impair genitourinary and sexual function after rectal resection, like in open surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic surgery for mid- and low-rectal cancer can be recommended under optimal conditions. Still, most level 1 evidence is for colon cancer surgery rather than rectal cancer. Upcoming results from large randomised trials are awaited to strengthen the evidence for improved short-term results and equal long-term results in comparison with the open approach.</p