Self-report and parent-report of physical and psychosocial well-being in Dutch adolescents with type 1 diabetes in relation to glycemic control

BACKGROUND: To determine physical and psychosocial well-being of adolescents with type 1 diabetes by self-report and parent report and to explore associations with glycemic control and other clinical and socio-demographic characteristics. METHODS: Demographic, medical and psychosocial data were gathered from 4 participating outpatient pediatric diabetes clinics in the Netherlands. Ninety-one patients completed the Child Health Questionnaire-CF87 (CHQ-CF87), Centre for Epidemiological Studies scale for Depression (CES-D), and the DFCS (Diabetes-specific Family Conflict Scale). Parents completed the CHQ-PF50, CES-D and the DFCS. RESULTS: Mean age was 14.9 years (± 1.1), mean HbA(1c )8.8% (± 1.7; 6.2–15.0%). Compared to healthy controls, patients scored lower on CHQ subscales role functioning-physical and general health. Parents reported less favorable scores on the behavior subscale than adolescents. Fewer diabetes-specific family conflicts were associated with better psychosocial well-being and less depressive symptoms. Living in a one-parent family, being member of an ethnic minority and reporting lower well-being were all associated with higher HbA(1c )values. CONCLUSION: Overall, adolescents with type 1 diabetes report optimal well-being and parent report is in accordance with these findings. Poor glycemic control is common, with single-parent families and ethnic minorities particularly at risk. High HbA(1c )values are related to lower social and family functioning

Endoscopic full-thickness resection (eFTR) of colorectal lesions: results from the Dutch colorectal eFTR registry

Background Endoscopic full-thickness resection (eFTR) is a minimally invasive resection technique that allows definite diagnosis and treatment for complex colorectal lesions Methods Consecutive patients undergoing eFTR in 20 hospitals were prospectively included. The primary outcome was technical success, defined as macroscopic complete en bloc resection. Secondary outcomes were: clinical success, defined as tumor-free resection margins (R0 resection); full-thickness resection rate; and adverse events. Results Between July 2015 and October 2018, 367 procedures were included. Indications were difficult polyps (non-lifting sign and/or difficult location; n = 133), primary resection of suspected T1 colorectal cancer (CRC; n = 71), reresection after incomplete resection of T1 CRC (n = 150), and subepithelial tumors (n = 13). Technical success was achieved in 308 procedures (83.9%). In 21 procedures (5.7 %), eFTR was not performed because the lesion could not be reached or retracted into the cap. In the remaining 346 procedures, R0 resection was achieved in 285 (82.4%) and full-thickness resection in 288 (83.2%). The median diameter of resected specimens was 23mm. Overall adverse event rate was 9.3% (n = 34/367): 10 patients (2.7 %) required emergency surgery for five delayed and two immediate perforations and three cases of appendicitis. Conclusion eFTR is an effective and relatively safe en bloc resection technique for complex colorectal lesions with the potential to avoid surgery. Further studies assessing the role of eFTR in early CRC treatment with long-term outcomes are needed

Endoscopic full-thickness resection (eFTR) of colorectal lesions:results from the Dutch colorectal eFTR registry

Background Endoscopic full-thickness resection (eFTR) is a minimally invasive resection technique that allows definite diagnosis and treatment for complex colorectal lesions Methods Consecutive patients undergoing eFTR in 20 hospitals were prospectively included. The primary outcome was technical success, defined as macroscopic complete en bloc resection. Secondary outcomes were: clinical success, defined as tumor-free resection margins (R0 resection); full-thickness resection rate; and adverse events. Results Between July 2015 and October 2018, 367 procedures were included. Indications were difficult polyps (non-lifting sign and/or difficult location; n = 133), primary resection of suspected T1 colorectal cancer (CRC; n = 71), reresection after incomplete resection of T1 CRC (n = 150), and subepithelial tumors (n = 13). Technical success was achieved in 308 procedures (83.9%). In 21 procedures (5.7 %), eFTR was not performed because the lesion could not be reached or retracted into the cap. In the remaining 346 procedures, R0 resection was achieved in 285 (82.4%) and full-thickness resection in 288 (83.2%). The median diameter of resected specimens was 23mm. Overall adverse event rate was 9.3% (n = 34/367): 10 patients (2.7 %) required emergency surgery for five delayed and two immediate perforations and three cases of appendicitis. Conclusion eFTR is an effective and relatively safe en bloc resection technique for complex colorectal lesions with the potential to avoid surgery. Further studies assessing the role of eFTR in early CRC treatment with long-term outcomes are needed

Full-Thickness Scar Resection after R1/Rx Excised T1 Colorectal Cancers as an Alternative to Completion Surgery

INTRODUCTION:Local full-thickness resections of the scar (FTRS) after local excision of a T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) with uncertain resection margins is proposed as an alternative strategy to completion surgery (CS), provided that no local intramural residual cancer (LIRC) is found. However, a comparison on long-term oncological outcome between both strategies is missing.METHODS:A large cohort of patients with consecutive T1 CRC between 2000 and 2017 was used. Patients were selected if they underwent a macroscopically complete local excision of a T1 CRC but positive or unassessable (R1/Rx) resection margins at histology and without lymphovascular invasion or poor differentiation. Patients treated with CS or FTRS were compared on the presence of CRC recurrence, a 5-year overall survival, disease-free survival, and metastasis-free survival.RESULTS:Of 3,697 patients with a T1 CRC, 434 met the inclusion criteria (mean age 66 years, 61% men). Three hundred thirty-four patients underwent CS, and 100 patients underwent FTRS. The median follow-up period was 64 months. CRC recurrence was seen in 7 patients who underwent CS (2.2%, 95% CI 0.9%-4.6%) and in 8 patients who underwent FTRS (9.0%, 95% CI 3.9%-17.7%). Disease-free survival was lower in FTRS strategy (96.8% vs 89.9%, P = 0.019), but 5 of the 8 FTRS recurrences could be treated with salvage surgery. The metastasis-free survival (CS 96.8% vs FTRS 92.1%, P = 0.10) and overall survival (CS 95.6% vs FTRS 94.4%, P = 0.55) did not differ significantly between both strategies.DISCUSSION:FTRS after local excision of a T1 CRC with R1/Rx resection margins as a sole risk factor, followed by surveillance and salvage surgery in case of CRC recurrence, could be a valid alternative strategy to CS