Lymph node ratio and surgical quality are strong prognostic factors of rectal cancer: results from a single referral centre.

AIM: Nodal stage is a strong prognostic factor of oncological outcome of rectal cancer. To compensate for the variation in total number of harvested nodes, calculation of the lymph node ratio (LNR) has been advocated. The aim of the study was to compare the impact, on the long-term oncological outcome, of the LNR with other predictive factors, including the quality of total mesorectal excision (TME) and the state of the circumferential resection margin. METHOD: Consecutive patients having elective surgery for nonmetastatic rectal cancer were extracted from a prospectively maintained database. Retrospective uni- and multivariate analyses were performed based on patient-, surgical- and tumour-related factors. The prognostic value of the LNR on overall survival (OS) and on overall recurrence-free survival (ORFS) was assessed and a cut-off value was determined. RESULTS: From 1998 to 2013, out of 456 patients, 357 with nonmetastatic disease were operated on for rectal cancer. Neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy was administered to 66.7% of the patients. The mean number of lymph nodes retrieved was 12.8 ± 8.78 per surgical specimen. A lower lymph node yield was obtained in patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (11.8 vs 14.2; P = 0.014). The 5-year ORFS was 71.8% and the 5-year OS was 80.1%. Multivariate analysis confirmed LNR, the quality of TME and age to be independent prognostic factors of OS. LNR, age and perineural infiltration were independently associated with ORFS. Low- and high-risk patients could be discriminated using an LNR cut-off value of 0.2. CONCLUSION: LNR is an independent prognostic factor of OS and ORFS. In line with the principles of optimal surgical management, the quality of TME and lymph node yield are essential technical requirements.

[Correlations between the type of distribution of the branches of the inferior mesenteric artery and the aspect of the mesocolon]. / Corelatiile dintre tipurile de distributie a colateralelor arterei mezenterice inferioare si aspectul mezoului.

Emergence pattern of inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) branches leaded to description of 6 types of arterial distribution, each of them being correlated with a certain mesocolon aspect. The height of mesosigmoid depends on coalescence pattern and grade, and has a particular importance in terminal colic and retroperitoneal viscera's surgery. For each of the 6 types of distribution are described different ways of differential ligatures, for elongation and descending the colon, initially establishing the predominant collateral trunks. For practicing these ligatures we have to take count of preoperative paraclinic investigations, general and particular haemodynamic conditions and some intraoperatory parameters.

[A microsurgical patient, a procedural dilemma]. / Un pacient microchirurgical, o dilema tactica.

We are presenting a case which had five operations with the central point being the microsurgery. The patient is admitted in our unit 48 ours after sustaining a complex trauma of the left forearm with cvasicomplete destruction of the volar muscles, defects on cubital and radial vasculo-nervous axes and the median nerve. Upon arrival we performed the staged surgical debridement, ligature of the radial and ulnar vessels, anchoring of the ends of the nerves, forearm volar and dorsal fasciotomies, followed by skin grafting. After five months, the grafted skin is replaced by an ipsilateral parascapular free flap. After other three months we repaired the nerves by the mean of sural nerve grafts. The particularity of the case consists in fact that the ulnar nerve, with a longer defect, was reconstructed in a two stage approach. Long-time follow up (one year) shows a very good functional clinical result, confirmed by electromyography. Apart from the clinical challenge, this case confronted us with tactical dilemma. In a case of the facial nerve for the best results the cross-face is performed in two stages. Why shouldn't we do the same thing for all the nerve grafts when we are faced to semnificative defects?