Tumour budding and tumour–stroma ratio in hepatocellular carcinoma

Abstract Background: Tumour budding and low tumour–stroma ratio (TSR) are associated with poor prognosis in some cancers, but their value in Western hepatocellular carcinoma is unclear. The prognostic value of tumour budding and TSR in hepatocellular carcinoma was examined. Methods: Some 259 hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated in Oulu University Hospital 1983–2018 were included in this retrospective cohort study. Tumour budding and TSR were analysed from the haematoxylin- and eosin-stained original diagnostic slides, by dividing patients into bud-negative (0 bud) or bud-positive (≥1 bud) groups, and into high TSR (<50%) and low TSR (≥50%) groups. Surgically treated patients (n = 47) and other treatments (n = 212) were analysed separately. Primary outcomes were overall, and disease-specific 5-year mortality was adjusted for confounding factors. Results: Surgically treated patients with positive tumour budding had increased 5-year overall (adjusted HR 3.87, 95% CI 1.10–13.61) and disease-specific (adjusted HR 6.17, 95% CI 1.19–31.90) mortality compared with bud-negative patients. In surgically treated patients, TSR had no effect on 5-year overall (adjusted HR 2.03, 95% CI 0.57–7.21) or disease-specific (adjusted HR 3.23, 95% CI 0.78–13.37) mortality. No difference in survival related to tumour budding and TSR in non-surgically treated patients was observed. Conclusions: Tumour budding is a prognostic factor in surgically treated hepatocellular carcinoma

Treatment trends and outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma in a single center for 35 years

Abstract Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the leading causes of cancer mortality. The aim of this study was to examine the trends of HCC treatment and the outcomes in a single tertiary center for 35 years. Methods: Two hundred seventy–three consecutive HCC patients between 1983–2018 were identified from Oulu University Hospital records. Primary outcomes of the study were postoperative complications within 30 days after the operation, and short– (30–and 90–day) and long-term (1, 3 and 5–year) survival. Results: Of the 273 patients, 49 underwent surgical resection, 25 local ablation, 48 angiological treatment and 151 had palliative treatment. The rate of surgery declined over time, while other invasive treatments increased. Major complications occurred in 14 (28.6%) patients after surgical resection, in 2 (8.0%) patients after local ablation and in 13 (27.1%) patients after angiological treatment (P=0.022). Recurrence and local recidives were observed especially in local ablation group and in angiological treatment group (P<0.001). Overall survival rates in surgical resection group were at 30 and 90 days, 1–, 3– and 5–years 95.9%, 95.9%, 85.1%, 59.0% and 51.2%. In local ablation group, respective overall survival rates were 100.0%, 100.0%, 86.1%, 43.1% and 18.8%, and in angiological group 95.8%, 93.6%, 56.1%, 26.3% and 6.6%. In cox regression model adjusted for confounding factors, mortality hazard was lowest after surgical resection. Prognosis was poor in palliative group. Conclusions: Based on this Northern Finland population, the surgical resection of HCC has acceptable complication rate compared to other treatments; and yields the best long-term survival. Overall prognosis of HCC remains poor

Does ventral rectopexy improve pelvic floor function in the long term?

Abstract Background: Information is needed on long-term functional results, sequelas, and outcome predictors for laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy. Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate long-term function postventral rectopexy in patients with external rectal prolapse or internal rectal prolapse in a large cohort and to identify the possible effects of patient-related factors and operative technical details on patient-reported outcomes. Design: This was a retrospective review with a cross-sectional questionnaire study. Settings: Data were collated from prospectively collected registries in 2 university and 2 central hospitals in Finland. Patients: All 508 consecutive patients treated with ventral rectopexy for external rectal prolapse or symptomatic internal rectal prolapse in 2005 to 2013 were included. Interventions: A questionnaire concerning disease-related symptoms and effect on quality of life was used. Main outcome measures: Defecatory function measured by the Wexner score, the obstructive defecation score, and subjective symptom and quality-of-life evaluation using the visual analog scale were included. The effects of patient-related factors and operative technical details were assessed using multivariate analysis. Results: The questionnaire response rate was 70.7% (330/467 living patients) with a median follow-up time of 44 months. The mean Wexner scores were 7.0 (SD = 6.1) and 6.9 (SD = 5.6), and the mean obstructive defecation scores were 9.7 (SD = 7.6) and 12.3 (SD = 8.0) for patients presenting with external rectal prolapse and internal rectal prolapse. Subjective symptom relief was experienced by 76% and reported more often by patients with external rectal prolapse than with internal rectal prolapse (86% vs 68%; p < 0.001). Complications occurred in 11.4% of patients, and the recurrence rate for rectal prolapse was 7.1%. Limitations: This study was limited by its lack of preoperative functional data and suboptimal questionnaire response rate. Conclusions: Ventral mesh rectopexy effectively treats posterior pelvic floor dysfunction with a low complication rate and an acceptable recurrence rate. Patients with external rectal prolapse benefit more from the operation than those with symptomatic internal rectal prolapse. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A479

Synthetic mesh versus biological mesh to prevent incisional hernia after loop-ileostomy closure : a randomized feasibility trial

BackgroundIncisional hernia is a frequent complication after loop-ileostomy closure, rationalizing hernia prevention. Biological meshes have been widely used in contaminated surgical sites instead of synthetic meshes in fear of mesh related complications. However, previous studies on meshes does not support this practice. The aim of Preloop trial was to study the safety and efficacy of synthetic mesh compared to a biological mesh in incisional hernia prevention after loop-ileostomy closure.MethodsThe Preloop randomized, feasibility trial was conducted from April 2018 until November 2021 in four hospitals in Finland. The trial enrolled 102 patients with temporary loop-ileostomy after anterior resection for rectal cancer. The study patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either a light-weight synthetic polypropylene mesh (Parietene Macro (TM), Medtronic) (SM) or a biological mesh (Permacol (TM), Medtronic) (BM) to the retrorectus space at ileostomy closure. The primary end points were rate of surgical site infections (SSI) at 30-day follow-up and incisional hernia rate during 10 months' follow-up period.ResultsOf 102 patients randomized, 97 received the intended allocation. At 30-day follow-up, 94 (97%) patients were evaluated. In the SM group, 1/46 (2%) had SSI. Uneventful recovery was reported in 38/46 (86%) in SM group. In the BM group, 2/48 (4%) had SSI (p > 0.90) and in 43/48 (90%) uneventful recovery was reported. The mesh was removed from one patient in both groups (p > 0.90).ConclusionsBoth a synthetic mesh and biological mesh were safe in terms of SSI after loop-ileostomy closure. Hernia prevention efficacy will be published after the study patients have completed the 10 months' follow-up.Peer reviewe

Synthetic mesh versus biological mesh to prevent incisional hernia after loop-ileostomy closure:a randomized feasibility trial

Abstract Background: Incisional hernia is a frequent complication after loop-ileostomy closure, rationalizing hernia prevention. Biological meshes have been widely used in contaminated surgical sites instead of synthetic meshes in fear of mesh related complications. However, previous studies on meshes does not support this practice. The aim of Preloop trial was to study the safety and efficacy of synthetic mesh compared to a biological mesh in incisional hernia prevention after loop-ileostomy closure. Methods: The Preloop randomized, feasibility trial was conducted from April 2018 until November 2021 in four hospitals in Finland. The trial enrolled 102 patients with temporary loop-ileostomy after anterior resection for rectal cancer. The study patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either a light-weight synthetic polypropylene mesh (Parietene Macro™, Medtronic) (SM) or a biological mesh (Permacol™, Medtronic) (BM) to the retrorectus space at ileostomy closure. The primary end points were rate of surgical site infections (SSI) at 30-day follow-up and incisional hernia rate during 10 months’ follow-up period. Results: Of 102 patients randomized, 97 received the intended allocation. At 30-day follow-up, 94 (97%) patients were evaluated. In the SM group, 1/46 (2%) had SSI. Uneventful recovery was reported in 38/46 (86%) in SM group. In the BM group, 2/48 (4%) had SSI (p > 0.90) and in 43/48 (90%) uneventful recovery was reported. The mesh was removed from one patient in both groups (p > 0.90). Conclusions: Both a synthetic mesh and biological mesh were safe in terms of SSI after loop-ileostomy closure. Hernia prevention efficacy will be published after the study patients have completed the 10 months’ follow-up