Voorprocedures bij toelating, schorsing en verwijdering in het funderend onderwijs (deel 3)

Coherent privaatrech

Omitting re-excision for focally positive margins after breast-conserving surgery does not impair disease-free and overall survival

Purpose: In contrast to other countries, the Dutch breast cancer guideline does not recommend re-excision for focally positive margins after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in invasive tumor and does recommend whole-breast irradiation including boost. We investigated whether omitting re-excision as compared to performing re-excision affects prognosis with a retrospective population-based cohort study. Methods: The total cohort included 32,119 women with primary BCS for T1–T3 breast cancer diagnosed between 2003 and 2008 from the nationwide Netherlands cancer registry. The subcohort included 10,433 patients in whom the resection margins were registered. Outcome measures were 5-year ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) rate, 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate, and 10-year overall survival (OS) rate. Results: In the total cohort, 25,878 (80.6%) did not have re-excision, 2368 (7.4%) had re-excision by BCS, and 3873 (12.1%) had re-excision by mastectomy. Five-year IBTR rates were 2.1, 2.8, and 2.9%, respectively (p = 0.001). In the subcohort, 7820 (75.0%) had negative margins without re-excision, 492 (4.7%) had focally positive margins without re-excision, 586 (5.6%) had focally positive margins and underwent re-excision, and 1535 (14.7%) had extensively positive margins and underwent re-excision. Five-year IBTR rate was 2.3, 2.9, 1.1, and 2.9%, respectively (p = 0.099). Compared to omitting re-excision, performing re-excision for focally positive margins was associated with lower risk of IBTR (adjusted HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.11–0.82), but not with DFS (adjusted HR 0.83 95% CI 0.59–1.17) nor with OS (adjusted HR 1.17 95% CI 0.87–1.59). Conclusion: Omitting re-excision in breast cancer patients for focally positive margins after BCS does not impair DFS and OS, provided that whole-breast irradiation including boost is given

Next-generation tissue-engineered heart valves with repair, remodelling and regeneration capacity

Valvular heart disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Surgical valve repair or replacement has been the standard of care for patients with valvular heart disease for many decades, but transcatheter heart valve therapy has revolutionized the field in the past 15 years. However, despite the tremendous technical evolution of transcatheter heart valves, to date, the clinically available heart valve prostheses for surgical and transcatheter replacement have considerable limitations. The design of next-generation tissue-engineered heart valves (TEHVs) with repair, remodelling and regenerative capacity can address these limitations, and TEHVs could become a promising therapeutic alternative for patients with valvular disease. In this Review, we present a comprehensive overview of current clinically adopted heart valve replacement options, with a focus on transcatheter prostheses. We discuss the various concepts of heart valve tissue engineering underlying the design of next-generation TEHVs, focusing on off-the-shelf technologies. We also summarize the latest preclinical and clinical evidence for the use of these TEHVs and describe the current scientific, regulatory and clinical challenges associated with the safe and broad clinical translation of this technology.</p