Platelet-activating factor mediates trinitrobenzene induced dysmotility in the left colon

We investigated whether TNB alters colonic tissue levels of PAF at the expense of changes in colonic motility in the isolated perfused rabbit left colon. Colonic inflammation was induced by the intracolonic administration of 0.25 ml of 50% ethanol containing 30 mg of trinitrobenzene. Strain gauge transducers were sewn onto the serosal surface of the colon to evaluate colonic motility. TNB administration increased tissue levels of PAF and increased the average force of each colonic contraction. Pretreatment with the PAF receptor antagonist WEB-2170 prior to TNB infusion decreased tissue concentrations of PAF and ameliorated the altered motility parameters seen with TNB alone. These results suggest that PAF is stimulated by TNB and may participate in colonic dysmotility during inflammatory states

Clostridium difficile suppresses colonic vasoactive intestinal peptide associated with altered motility

We investigated whether Clostridium difficile toxin alters colonic tissue levels of vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP) at the expense of changes in colonic motility in the isolated perfused rabbit left colon. Colonic inflammation was induced by the intracolonic administration of 10−8 M C. difflcile toxin. Strain gauge transducers were sewn onto the serosal surface of the colon to evaluate colonic motility. C. difflcile administration produced histologic changes consistent with epithelial damage. This was associated with an increased production of prostaglandin E2 and thromboxane B2. Tissue levels of VIP but not substance P were significantly reduced. This was associated with an increased number of contractions per minute and an average force of each colonic contraction. These results suggest that tissue levels of VIP are suppressed by C. difflcile and may participate in colonic dysmotility during active inflammation

Cecal Polypoid Arteriovenous Malformations Removed by Endoscopic Biopsy

Colonic arteriovenous malformation (AVM) is one of the causes of lower gastrointestinal bleeding. Unlike small vascular ectasia or angiodysplasia, colonic AVM tends to be solitary, large in size, and identified endoscopically as flat or elevated bright red lesion. Herein, we report a case of non-solitary and small cecal AVMs which were removed by endoscopic biopsy. A 66-yr-old woman was referred for routine gastrointestinal cancer screening. She was suffering from diabetes, hypertension, end-stage renal disease, and anemia of chronic disease. On colonoscopic finding, three semi-pedunculated polyps, less than 5 mm in size, were noticed near to the appendiceal orifice. Since the lesions revealed normal-looking epithelium with converging folds on the cecal base, lesions were diagnosed as inflammatory polyps on gross finding. Three biopsies were taken from each lesion. Bleeding from the biopsied site ceased spontaneously. Histopathologic evaluation demonstrated intramucosal hemorrhage and dilated submucosal vessels which were consistent with polypoid colonic AVMs

EXPERIENCIA EDUCATIVA : TALLER DE RECURSOS NATURALES II

El Taller de Recursos Naturales II (TRN II) se desarrolla durante el 2do cuatrimestre del segundo año de Agronomía. La información obtenida por los alumnos es utilizada en el Taller de Producción Vegetal en el 4to Año. De acuerdo a la estructura y lineamientos del Plan de Estudios, el TRN II integra actividades de las asignaturas dictadas en ese cuatrimestre como: Propiedades Edáficas y Fertilidad, Fisiología Vegetal, Genética Básica y Aplicada y Agrometeorología, además de Ecología y Zoología Agrícola, asignaturas de tercero y cuarto año respectivamente. Tiene como objetivo conducir al alumno hacia una compresión global de los factores que afectan el crecimiento de las plantas con el fin de mantener o aumentar la producción, dentro del marco de una agricultura sustentable. Finaliza con una puesta en común donde se interpretan los resultados en términos ecofisiológicos y de interacción genotipo-ambiente, utilizando información obtenida de las demás asignaturas. Así, otorga a los futuros profesionales la capacidad de analizar los conocimientos adquiridos a campo y en el laboratorio, a la luz de los factores investigados durante el desarrollo del Taller

Intensified surveillance after surgery for colorectal cancer significantly improves survival

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Postoperative surveillance after curative resection for colorectal cancer has been demostrated to improve survival. It remains unknown however, whether intensified surveillance provides a significant benefit regarding outcome and survival. This study was aimed at comparing different surveillance strategies regarding their effect on long-term outcome.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Between 1990 and 2006, all curative resections for colorectal cancer were selected from our prospective colorectal cancer database. All patients were offered to follow our institution's surveillance programm according to the ASCO guidelines. We defined surveillance as "intensive" in cases where > 70% appointments were attended and the program was completed. As "minimal" we defined surveillance with < 70% of the appointments attended and an incomplete program. As "none" we defined the group which did not take part in any surveillance.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Out of 1469 patients 858 patients underwent "intensive", 297 "minimal" and 314 "none" surveillance. The three groups were well balanced regarding biographical data and tumor characteristics. The 5-year survival rates were 79% (intensive), 76% (minimal) and 54% (none) (OR 1.480, (95% CI 1.135-1.929); <it>p </it>< 0.0001), respectively. The 10-year survival rates were 65% (intensive), 50% (minimal) and 31% (none) (<it>p </it>< 0.0001), respectively. With a median follow-up of 70 months the median time of survival was 191 months (intensive), 116 months (minimal) and 66 months (none) (<it>p </it>< 0.0001). After recurrence, the 5-year survival rates were 32% (intensive, <it>p </it>= 0.034), 13% (minimal, <it>p </it>= 0.001) and 19% (none, <it>p </it>= 0.614). The median time of survival after recurrence was 31 months (intensive, <it>p </it>< 0.0001), 21 months (minimal, <it>p </it>< 0.0001) and 16 month (none, <it>p </it>< 0.0001) respectively.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Intensive surveillance after curative resection of colorectal cancer improves survival. In cases of recurrent disease, intensive surveillance has a positive impact on patients' prognosis. Large randomized, multicenter trials are needed to substantiate these results.</p

Loss of heterozygosity at 18q21 is indicative of recurrence and therefore poor prognosis in a subset of colorectal cancers

Adjuvant therapies are increasingly used in colorectal cancers for the prevention of recurrence. These therapies have side-effects and should, thus, be used only if really beneficial. However, the development of recurrence cannot be predicted reliably at the moment of diagnosis, and targeting of adjuvant therapies is thus based only on the primary stage of the cancer. Loss of heterozygosity (LOH) in the long arm of chromosome 18 is suggested to be related to poor survival and possibly to the development of metastases. We studied the value of LOH at 18q21 as a marker of colorectal cancer prognosis, association with clinicopathological variables, tumour recurrence and survival of the patients. Of the 255 patients studied, 195 were informative as regards LOH status when analysed in primary colorectal cancer specimens using the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and fragment analysis. LOH at 18q21 was significantly associated with the development of recurrence (P= 0.01) and indicated poor survival in patients of Dukes' classes B and C, in which most recurrences (82%) occurred. An increased rate of tumour recurrence is the reason for poor survival among patients with LOH at 18q21 in primary cancer. These patients are a possible target group for recurrence-preventing adjuvant therapies. © 1999 Cancer Research Campaig

Follow-up of patients with curatively resected colorectal cancer: a practice guideline

BACKGROUND: A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the literature regarding the impact of follow-up on colorectal cancer patient survival and, in a second phase, recommendations were developed. METHODS: The MEDLINE, CANCERLIT, and Cochrane Library databases, and abstracts published in the 1997 to 2002 proceedings of the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology were systematically searched for evidence. Study selection was limited to randomized trials and meta-analyses that examined different programs of follow-up after curative resection of colorectal cancer where five-year overall survival was reported. External review by Ontario practitioners was obtained through a mailed survey. Final approval of the practice guideline report was obtained from the Practice Guidelines Coordinating Committee. RESULTS: Six randomized trials and two published meta-analyses of follow-up were obtained. Of six randomized trials comparing one follow-up program to a more intense program, only two individual trials detected a statistically significant survival benefit favouring the more intense follow-up program. Pooling of all six randomized trials demonstrated a significant improvement in survival favouring more intense follow-up (Relative Risk Ratio 0.80 (95%CI, 0.70 to 0.91; p = 0.0008). Although the rate of recurrence was similar in both of the follow-up groups compared, asymptomatic recurrences and re-operations for cure of recurrences were more common in patients with more intensive follow-up. Trials including CEA monitoring and liver imaging also had significant results, whereas trials not including these tests did not. CONCLUSION: Follow-up programs for patients with curatively resected colorectal cancer do improve survival. These follow-up programs include frequent visits and performance of blood CEA, chest x-rays, liver imaging and colonoscopy, however, it is not clear which tests or frequency of visits is optimal. There is a suggestion that improved survival is due to diagnosis of recurrence at an earlier, asymptomatic stage which allows for more curative resection of recurrence. Based on this evidence and consideration of the biology of colorectal cancer and present practices, a guideline was developed. Patients should be made aware of the risk of disease recurrence or second bowel cancer, the potential benefits of follow-up and the uncertainties requiring further clinical trials. For patients at high-risk of recurrence (stages IIb and III) clinical assessment is recommended when symptoms occur or at least every 6 months the first 3 years and yearly for at least 5 years. At the time of those visits, patients may have blood CEA, chest x-ray and liver imaging. For patients at lower risk of recurrence (stages I and Ia) or those with co-morbidities impairing future surgery, only visits yearly or when symptoms occur. All patients should have a colonoscopy before or within 6 months of initial surgery, and repeated yearly if villous or tubular adenomas >1 cm are found; otherwise repeat every 3 to 5 years. All patients having recurrences should be assessed by a multidisciplinary team in a cancer centre