7 research outputs found
Colorectal Cancer Stage at Diagnosis Before vs During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Italy
IMPORTANCE Delays in screening programs and the reluctance of patients to seek medical
attention because of the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 could be associated with the risk of more advanced
colorectal cancers at diagnosis.
OBJECTIVE To evaluate whether the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic was associated with more advanced
oncologic stage and change in clinical presentation for patients with colorectal cancer.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This retrospective, multicenter cohort study included all
17 938 adult patients who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer from March 1, 2020, to December
31, 2021 (pandemic period), and from January 1, 2018, to February 29, 2020 (prepandemic period),
in 81 participating centers in Italy, including tertiary centers and community hospitals. Follow-up was
30 days from surgery.
EXPOSURES Any type of surgical procedure for colorectal cancer, including explorative surgery,
palliative procedures, and atypical or segmental resections.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was advanced stage of colorectal cancer
at diagnosis. Secondary outcomes were distant metastasis, T4 stage, aggressive biology (defined as
cancer with at least 1 of the following characteristics: signet ring cells, mucinous tumor, budding,
lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, and lymphangitis), stenotic lesion, emergency surgery,
and palliative surgery. The independent association between the pandemic period and the outcomes
was assessed using multivariate random-effects logistic regression, with hospital as the cluster
variable.
RESULTS A total of 17 938 patients (10 007 men [55.8%]; mean [SD] age, 70.6 [12.2] years)
underwent surgery for colorectal cancer: 7796 (43.5%) during the pandemic period and 10 142
(56.5%) during the prepandemic period. Logistic regression indicated that the pandemic period was
significantly associated with an increased rate of advanced-stage colorectal cancer (odds ratio [OR],
1.07; 95%CI, 1.01-1.13; P = .03), aggressive biology (OR, 1.32; 95%CI, 1.15-1.53; P < .001), and stenotic
lesions (OR, 1.15; 95%CI, 1.01-1.31; P = .03).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This cohort study suggests a significant association between the
SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the risk of a more advanced oncologic stage at diagnosis among patients
undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer and might indicate a potential reduction of survival for
these patients
Infected pancreatic necrosis: outcomes and clinical predictors of mortality. A post hoc analysis of the MANCTRA-1 international study
: The identification of high-risk patients in the early stages of infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) is critical, because it could help the clinicians to adopt more effective management strategies. We conducted a post hoc analysis of the MANCTRA-1 international study to assess the association between clinical risk factors and mortality among adult patients with IPN. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify prognostic factors of mortality. We identified 247 consecutive patients with IPN hospitalised between January 2019 and December 2020. History of uncontrolled arterial hypertension (pâ=â0.032; 95% CI 1.135-15.882; aOR 4.245), qSOFA (pâ=â0.005; 95% CI 1.359-5.879; aOR 2.828), renal failure (pâ=â0.022; 95% CI 1.138-5.442; aOR 2.489), and haemodynamic failure (pâ=â0.018; 95% CI 1.184-5.978; aOR 2.661), were identified as independent predictors of mortality in IPN patients. Cholangitis (pâ=â0.003; 95% CI 1.598-9.930; aOR 3.983), abdominal compartment syndrome (pâ=â0.032; 95% CI 1.090-6.967; aOR 2.735), and gastrointestinal/intra-abdominal bleeding (pâ=â0.009; 95% CI 1.286-5.712; aOR 2.710) were independently associated with the risk of mortality. Upfront open surgical necrosectomy was strongly associated with the risk of mortality (pâ<â0.001; 95% CI 1.912-7.442; aOR 3.772), whereas endoscopic drainage of pancreatic necrosis (pâ=â0.018; 95% CI 0.138-0.834; aOR 0.339) and enteral nutrition (pâ=â0.003; 95% CI 0.143-0.716; aOR 0.320) were found as protective factors. Organ failure, acute cholangitis, and upfront open surgical necrosectomy were the most significant predictors of mortality. Our study confirmed that, even in a subgroup of particularly ill patients such as those with IPN, upfront open surgery should be avoided as much as possible. Study protocol registered in ClinicalTrials.Gov (I.D. Number NCT04747990)
Major device-related complications during regional chemotherapy
Abstract From September 1985 to December 1990, 51 patients were treated by locoregional chemotherapy by means of a totally implantable system: 35 patients for hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer and 2 for hepatocellular carcinoma had the system implanted in the hepatic artery via the gastroduodenal artery; 14 patients underwent peritoneal chemotherapy, 11 for peritoneal carcinomatosis and 3 for adjuvant therapy. Totally implantable arterial 'ports' were used for the hepatic chemotherapy, while Tenckhoff-type ports were used for peritoneal chemotherapy. Among the 51 cases, 6 major complications were observed, 5 in the group submitted to hepatic chemotherapy and one following intracavitary therapy. The complications observed were thrombosis of the hepatic artery in 2 cases, dislodgement of the catheter into the duodenal lumen in 2 cases, and 1 case of rupture of the catheter. The complications were treated by suspension of the therapy for hepatic artery thrombosis, endoscopic removal of the catheter from the duodenum (dislodgement) and explant of the system (rupture of the catheter). In 1 case we observed the dislodgement of the Tenckhoff port into the intestinal lumen and in this case laparotomy was necessary for catheter removal
Treatment strategies for neuroendocrine liver metastases: a systematic review.
BACKGROUND
Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors are often diagnosed when metastatic. The liver is the main site of metastases. Unfortunately, optimal management of neuroendocrine liver metastases remains a topic of debate. The aim of this study was to make a systematic review of the current literature about the results of the different treatments of neuroendocrine liver metastases.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted for English language publications from 1995 to 2021. Outcomes were analyzed according to survival, disease-free survival, and in the case of systemic therapies, progression-free survival.
RESULTS
5509 patients were analyzed in the review. 67% of patients underwent surgery achieving 5 years overall survival despite only 30% percent without a recurrence. 60% of patients that had received a transplant reached 5 years survival with a low disease-free survival rate (20%). Five-year survival rate was 36.2% for patients undergoing loco-regional therapies.
CONCLUSION
Surgical resection is the best treatment when metastases are resectable, with the highest rate of survival, although liver transplantation shows good results for patients not eligible for surgery. Loco-regional therapies may be useful when surgical resection is contraindicated, or selectively used as a bridge to surgery or transplantation. Systemic therapies are indicated in patients for whom curative treatment cannot be obtained
Current status of liver surgery for non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine liver metastases: the NON.LI.MET. Italian Society for Endoscopic Surgery and New Technologies (SICE) and Association of Italian Surgeons in Europe (ACIE) collaborative international survey
Despite the increasing trend in liver resections for non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine liver metastases (NCNNLM), the role of surgery for these liver malignancies is still debated. Registries are an essential, reliable tool for assessing epidemiology, diagnosis, and therapeutic approach in a single hub, especially when data are dispersive and inconclusive, as in our case. The dissemination of this preliminary survey would allow us to understand if the creation of an International Registry is a viable option, while still offering a snapshot on this issue, investigating clinical practices worldwide. The steering committee designed an online questionnaire with Google Forms, which consisted of 37 questions, and was open from October 5th, 2022, to November 30th, 2022. It was disseminated using social media and mailing lists of the Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery and New Technologies (SICE), the Association of Italian Surgeons in Europe (ACIE), and the Spanish Chapter of the American College of Surgeons (ACS). Overall, 141 surgeons (approximately 18% of the total invitations sent) from 27 countries on four continents participated in the survey. Most respondents worked in general surgery units (62%), performing less than 50 liver resections/year (57%). A multidisciplinary discussion was currently performed to validate surgical indications for NCNNLM in 96% of respondents. The most commonly adopted selection criteria were liver resectability, RECIST criteria, and absence of extrahepatic disease. Primary tumors were generally of gastrointestinal (42%), breast (31%), and pancreaticobiliary origin (13%). The most common interventions were parenchymal-sparing resections (51% of respondents) of metachronous metastases with an open approach. Major post-operative complications (Clavien-Dindo > 2) occurred in up to 20% of the procedures, according to 44% of respondents. A subset analysis of data from high-volume centers (> 100 cases/year) showed lower post-operative complications and better survival. The present survey shows that NCNNLM patients are frequently treated by surgeons in low-volume hospitals for liver surgery. Selection criteria are usually based on common sense. Liver resections are performed mainly with an open approach, possibly carrying a high burden of major post-operative complications. International guidelines and a specific consensus on this field are desirable, as well as strategies for collaboration between high-volume and low-volume centers. The present study can guide the elaboration of a multi-institutional document on the optimal pathway in the management of patients with NCNNLM
Effect of centre volume on pathological outcomes and postoperative complications after surgery for colorectal cancer: results of a multicentre national study
Background: The association between volume, complications and pathological outcomes is still under debate regarding colorectal cancer surgery. The aim of the study was to assess the association between centre volume and severe complications, mortality, less-than-radical oncologic surgery, and indications for neoadjuvant therapy.Methods: Retrospective analysis of 16,883 colorectal cancer cases from 80 centres (2018-2021). Outcomes: 30-day mortality; Clavien-Dindo grade >2 complications; removal of >= 12 lymph nodes; non-radical resection; neoadjuvant therapy. Quartiles of hospital volumes were classified as LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH, and VERY HIGH. Independent predictors, both overall and for rectal cancer, were evaluated using logistic regression including age, gender, AJCC stage and cancer site.Results: LOW-volume centres reported a higher rate of severe postoperative complications (OR 1.50, 95% c.i. 1.15-1.096, P = 0.003). The rate of >= 12 lymph nodes removed in LOW-volume (OR 0.68, 95% c.i. 0.56-0.85, P = 12 lymph nodes removed was lower in LOW-volume than in VERY HIGH-volume centres (OR 0.57, 95% c.i. 0.41-0.80, P = 0.001). A lower rate of neoadjuvant chemoradiation was associated with HIGH (OR 0.66, 95% c.i. 0.56-0.77, P < 0.001), MEDIUM (OR 0.75, 95% c.i. 0.60-0.92, P = 0.006), and LOW (OR 0.70, 95% c.i. 0.52-0.94, P = 0.019) volume centres (vs. VERY HIGH).Conclusion: Colorectal cancer surgery in low-volume centres is at higher risk of suboptimal management, poor postoperative outcomes, and less-than-adequate oncologic resections. Centralisation of rectal cancer cases should be taken into consideration to optimise the outcomes