12 research outputs found

    Correction to: Postoperative ileus concealing intra-abdominal complications in enhanced recovery programs—a retrospective analysis of the GRACE database

    No full text
    International audienceWhen the original article was first published the given name and family names of Francophone Group for Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (GRACE) individually cited within the author list were inadvertently interchanged. The author list are correctly cited in this Correction

    Effect of Interval (7 or 11 weeks) Between Neoadjuvant Radiochemotherapy and Surgery on Complete Pathologic Response in Rectal Cancer: A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial (GRECCAR-6)

    No full text
    International audiencePurpose A pathologic complete response (pCR; ypT0N0) of a rectal tumor after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (RCT) is associated with an excellent prognosis. Several retrospective studies have investigated the effect of increasing the delay after RCT. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of increasing the interval between the end of RCT and surgery on the pCR rate. Methods GRECCAR6 was a phase III, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group controlled trial. Patients with cT3/T4 or Tx N+ tumors of the mid or lower rectum who had received RCT (45 to 50 Gy with fluorouracil or capecitabine) were included. Patients were randomly included in the 7-week or the 11-week (11w) group. Primary end point was the pCR rate defined as a ypT0N0 specimen (NCT01648894). Results A total of 265 patients from 24 centers were enrolled between October 2012 and February 2015. The majority of the tumors were cT3 (82%). After RCT, surgery was not performed in nine patients (3.4%) because of the occurrence of distant metastasis (n = 5) or other reasons. Two patients underwent local resection of the tumor scar. A total of 47 (18.6%) specimens were classified as ypT0 (four had invaded lymph nodes [8.5%]). The primary end point (ypT0N0) was not different (7 weeks: 20 of 133, 15.0% v 11w: 23 of 132, 17.4%; P = .5983). Morbidity was significantly increased in the 11w group (44.5% v 32%; P = .0404) as a result of increased medical complications (32.8% v 19.2%; P = .0137). The 11w group had a worse quality of mesorectal resection (complete mesorectum [I] 78.7% v 90%; P = .0156). Conclusion Waiting 11 weeks after RCT did not increase the rate of pCR after surgical resection. A longer waiting period may be associated with higher morbidity and more difficult surgical resection

    Management of female pelvic organ prolapse—Summary of the 2021 HAS guidelines

    No full text
    International audienceWhen a patient presents with symptoms suggestive of pelvic organ prolapse (POP), clinical evaluation should include an assessment of symptoms, their impact on daily life and rule out other pelvic pathologies. The prolapse should be described compartment by compartment, indicating the extent of the externalization for each. The diagnosis of POP is clinical. Additional exams may be requested to explore the symptoms associated or not explained by the observed prolapse. Pelvic floor muscle training and pessaries are non-surgical conservative treatment options recommended as first-line therapy for pelvic organ prolapse. They can be offered in combination and be associated with the management of modifiable risk factors for prolapse. If the conservative therapeutic options do not meet the patient's expectations, surgery should be proposed if the symptoms are disabling, related to pelvic organ prolapse, detected on clinical examination and significant (stage 2 or more of the POP-Q classification). Surgical routes for POP repair can be abdominal with mesh placement, or vaginal with autologous tissue. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy is recommended for cases of apical and anterior prolapse. Autologous vaginal surgery (including colpocleisis) is a recommended option for elderly and fragile patients. For cases of isolated rectocele, the posterior vaginal route with autologous tissue should be preferentially performed over the transanal route. The decision to place a mesh must be made in consultation with a multidisciplinary team. After the surgery, the patient should be reassessed by the surgeon, even in the absence of symptoms or complications, and in the long term by a primary care or specialist doctor

    Does A Longer Waiting Period After Neoadjuvant Radio-chemotherapy Improve the Oncological Prognosis of Rectal Cancer?

    No full text
    International audienceObjective: The aim of this study was to report the 3-year survival results of the GRECCAR-6 trial.Summary background data: Current data on the effect of an extended interval between radiochemotherapy (RCT) and resection for rectal cancer on the rate of complete pathological response (pCR = ypT0N0) is controversial. Furthermore, its effect on oncological outcomes is unknown.Methods: The GRECCAR-6 trial was a phase III, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, controlled trial. Patients with cT3/T4 or TxN+ tumors of the mid or lower rectum who had received RCT (45-50 Gy with 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine) were included and randomized into a 7- or 11-week waiting period. Primary endpoint was the pCR rate. Secondary endpoints were 3-year overall (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence rates.Results: A total of 265 patients from 24 participating centers were enrolled. A total of 253 patients underwent a mesorectal excision. Overall pCR rate was 17% (43/253). Mean follow-up from surgical resection was 32 ± 8 months. Twenty-four deaths occurred with an 89% OS at 3 years. DFS was 68.7% at 3 years (75 recurrences). Three-year local and distant recurrences were 7.9% and 23.8%, respectively. The randomization group had no impact on the 3-year OS (P = 0.8868) or DFS (P = 0.9409). Distant (P = 0.7432) and local (P = 0.3944) recurrences were also not influenced by the waiting period. DFS was independently influenced by 3 factors: circumferential radial margin (CRM) ≤1 mm [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.03; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.17-3.51], ypT3-T4 (HR = 2.69; 95% CI, 1.19-6.08) and positive lymph nodes (HR = 3.62; 95% CI, 1.89-6.91).Conclusion: Extending the waiting period by 4 weeks following RCT has no influence on the oncological outcomes of T3/T4 rectal cancers

    Anti-TNF Therapy Is Associated With an Increased Risk of Postoperative Morbidity After Surgery for Ileocolonic Crohn Disease

    No full text
    Objective: To determine the risk factors of morbidity after surgery for ileocolonic Crohn disease (CD).Summary Background Data: The risk factors of morbidity after surgery for CD, particularly the role of anti-TNF therapy, remain controversial and have not been evaluated in a large prospective cohort study. Methods: From 2013 to 2015, data on 592 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for CD in 19 French specialty centers were collected prospectively. Possible relationships between anti-TNF and postoperative overall morbidity were tested by univariate and multivariate analyses. Because treatment by anti-TNF is possibly dependent on the characteristics of the patients and disease, a propensity score was calculated and introduced in the analyses using adjustment of the inverse probability of treatment-weighted method.Results: Postoperative mortality, overall and intra-abdominal septic morbidity rates in the entire cohort were 0%, 29.7%, and 8.4%, respectively; 143 (24.1%) patients had received anti-TNF 180 min (OR = 2.71; CI 95% = 1.54–4.78, P Conclusions: Preoperative anti-TNF therapy is associated with a higher risk of morbidity after surgery for ileocolonic CD. This information should be considered in the surgical management of these patients, particularly with regard to the preoperative preparation and indication of temporary defunctioning stoma

    Postoperative Morbidity After Iterative Ileocolonic Resection for Crohn’s Disease: Should we be Worried? A Prospective Multicentric Cohort Study of the GETAID Chirurgie

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To compare perioperative characteristics and outcomes between primary ileocolonic resection [PICR] and iterative ileocolic resection [IICR] for Crohn's disease [CD].METHODS: From 2013 to 2015, 567 patients undergoing ileocolonic resection were prospectively included in 19 centres of the GETAID chirurgie group. Perioperative characteristics and postoperative results of both groups [431 PICR, 136 IICR] were compared. Uni- and multivariate analyses of the risk factors of overall 30-day postoperative morbidity was carried out in the IICR group.RESULTS: IICR patients were less likely to be malnourished [27.2% vs 39.9%, p = 0.007], and had more stricturing forms [69.1% vs 54.3%, p = 0.002] and less perforating disease [19.9% vs 39.2%, p < 0.001]. Laparoscopy was less commonly used in IICR [45.6% vs 84.5%, p < 0.01] and was associated with increased conversion rates [27.4% vs 14.6%, p = 0.012]. Overall postoperative morbidity was 36.8% in the IICR group and 26.7% in the PICR group [p = 0.024]. There was no significant difference between IICR and PICR regarding septic intra-abdominal complications, anastomotic leakage [8.8% vs 8.4%] or temporary stoma requirement. IICR patients were more likely to present with non-infectious complications and ileus [11.8% vs 3.7%, p < 0.001]. Uni- and multivariate analyses did not identify specific risk factors of overall postoperative morbidity in the IICR group.CONCLUSIONS: Surgery for recurrent CD is associated with a slight increase of non-infectious morbidity [postoperative ileus] that mainly reflects the technical difficulties of these procedures. However, IICR remains a safe therapeutic option in patients with recurrent CD because severe morbidity including anastomotic complications is similar to patients undergoing primary resection
    corecore