“Long-term oncologic outcomes and risk factors for distant recurrence after pathologic complete response following neoadjuvant treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer. A nationwide, multicentre study”

Background: Pathologic complete response (pCR) after multimodal treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is used as surrogate marker of success as it is assumed to correlate with improved oncologic outcome. However, long-term oncologic data are scarce.Methods: This retrospective, multicentre study updated the oncologic follow-up of prospectively collected data from the Spanish Rectal Cancer Project database. pCR was described as no evidence of tumour cells in the specimen. Endpoints were distant metastases-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS). Multivariate regression analyses were run to identify factors associated with survival.Results: Overall, 32 different hospitals were involved, providing data on 815 patients with pCR. At a median follow-up of 73.4 (IQR 57.7-99.5) months, distant metastases occurred in 6.4% of patients. Abdominoperineal excision (APE) (HR 2.2, 95%CI 1.2-4.1, p = 0.008) and elevated CEA levels (HR = 1.9, 95% CI 1.0-3.7, p = 0.049) were independent risk factors for distant recurrence. Age (years) (HR 1.1; 95% CI 1.05-41.09; p < 0.001) and ASA III-IV (HR = 2.0; 95%-CI 1.4-2.9; p < 0.001), were the only factors associated with OS. The estimated 12, 36 and 60-months DMFS rates were 96.9%, 91.3%, and 86.8%. The estimated 12, 36 and 60-months OS rates were 99.1%, 94.9% and 89.3%.Conclusions: The incidence of metachronous distant metastases is low after pCR, with high rates of both DMFS and OS. The oncologic prognosis in LARC patients that achieve pCR after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is excellent in the long term. (c) 2023 Elsevier Ltd, BASO similar to The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved

Surgeons’ practice and preferences for the anal fissure treatment: results from an international survey

The best nonoperative or operative anal fissure (AF) treatment is not yet established, and several options have been proposed. Aim is to report the surgeons' practice for the AF treatment. Thirty-four multiple-choice questions were developed. Seven questions were about to participants' demographics and, 27 questions about their clinical practice. Based on the specialty (general surgeon and colorectal surgeon), obtained data were divided and compared between two groups. Five-hundred surgeons were included (321 general and 179 colorectal surgeons). For both groups, duration of symptoms for at least 6 weeks is the most important factor for AF diagnosis (30.6%). Type of AF (acute vs chronic) is the most important factor which guide the therapeutic plan (44.4%). The first treatment of choice for acute AF is ointment application for both groups (59.6%). For the treatment of chronic AF, this data is confirmed by colorectal surgeons (57%), but not by the general surgeons who prefer the lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS) (31.8%) (p = 0.0001). Botulin toxin injection is most performed by colorectal surgeons (58.7%) in comparison to general surgeons (20.9%) (p = 0.0001). Anal flap is mostly performed by colorectal surgeons (37.4%) in comparison to general surgeons (28.3%) (p = 0.0001). Fissurectomy alone is statistically significantly most performed by general surgeons in comparison to colorectal surgeons (57.9% and 43.6%, respectively) (p = 0.0020). This analysis provides useful information about the clinical practice for the management of a debated topic such as AF treatment. Shared guidelines and consensus especially focused on operative management are required to standardize the treatment and to improve postoperative results