Rectal cancer treatment and survival--comparison of two 5-year time intervals.

In last two decades there was a huge step forward concerning rectal cancer treatment. The aim of our study was comparison of two time intervals regarding the methods of treatment and results of radical rectal cancer surgery. 407 patients operated on for rectal cancer were included in study. Those were patients with elective radical resection of solitary rectal tumor who survived first month after the operation. Patients were divided in two groups regarding the time of operation. In group one were patients operated on between 1996 and 2000 and in group two patients operated on between 2001 and 2005. We compared our results in both intervals with special interest about type of operation considering localization of the tumor, local recurrence and cancer related survival. Significant differences were found between two groups. There were more sphincter saving operations in second group, less local recurrences and better survival than in first group. This study observed significant improvements at recurrence rates and total survival for patients operated on rectal cancer.

Prognostic value of additional pathological variables for long-term survival after curative resection of rectal cancer.

AIM: To evaluate the prognostic value of some pathological variables in rectal cancer survival. METHODS: 247 patients who underwent curative resection of rectal cancer were included in the study. The influence on survival of five pathological variables (histopathological tumor type, histopathological tumor grade differentiation, blood vessel invasion, perineural invasion and lymphatic invasion) was assessed using statistical analyses. RESULTS: Overall 5-year survival was 71.2%. Univariate analysis of all tested variables showed an effect on survival but only the effect of lymphatic invasion was statistically significant. At stages three and four it had a negative effect on survival (P = 0.0212). Lymphatic invasion also significantly affected cancer related survival in multivariate analysis at stages three and four. At lower stages (stage 0, stage 1 and stage 2) multivariate analysis showed a negative effect of perineural invasion on cancer related survival. CONCLUSION: Patients with lymphatic and perineural invasion have a higher risk for rectal cancer related death after curative resection. Examination of these variables should be an important step in detecting patients with a poorer prognosis.

Infected femoral pseudoaneurysms from intravenous drug abuse in young adults.

Intravenous or parenteral drug abuse is the most common cause of infected femoral artery pseudoaneurysms (IFAP). This complication of intravenous drug abuse is not only limb threatening but can also be life threatening. The management of IFAP is difficult and controversial. Generally speaking, ligation and excision of the pseudoaneurysm without revascularization is accepted procedure in the majority of patients, with acceptable morbidity and low rate of limb loss. However, it is not an appropriate procedure for cases of acute interruption of the femoral artery flow, where a high probability of amputation is expected. We present four cases of young patients (average 19.5 years, range 17-24) with IFAP, where primary reconstruction was performed due to the absence of a Doppler signal over the pedal arteries after ligation of the common femoral artery. In two cases complications in the form of hemorrhage and repeated infection developed in the late postoperative period; in one case excision and ligation was performed, and in the last case reconstruction with a silver-impregnated dacron prosthesis. None of the patients required an amputation. Overall prognosis is uncertain because of the high incidence of postoperative drug injection despite aggressive drug rehabilitation.

Acute Toxicity and Tumor Response in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer After Preoperative Chemoradiation Therapy With Shortening of the Overall Treatment Time Using Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy With Simultaneous Integrated Boost: A Phase 2 Trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This phase 2 study investigated the efficacy and safety of preoperative intensity modulated radiation therapy with a simultaneous integrated boost (IMRT-SIB) without dose escalation, concomitant with standard capecitabine chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between January 2014 and March 2015, 51 patients with operable stage II-III rectal adenocarcinoma received preoperative IMRT with pelvic dose of 41.8 Gy and simultaneously delivered 46.2 Gy to T2/3 and 48.4 Gy to T4 tumor in 22 fractions, concomitant with capecitabine, 825 mg/m2/12 hours, including weekends. The primary endpoint was pathologic complete response (pCR). RESULTS: Fifty patients completed preoperative treatment according to the protocol, and 47 underwent surgical resection. The sphincter preservation rate for the low rectal tumors was 62%, and the resection margins were free in all but 1 patient. Decrease in tumor and nodal stage was observed in 32 (68%) and 39 (83%) patients, respectively, with pCR achieved in 12 (25.5%) patients. There were only 2 G ≥ 3 acute toxicities, with infectious enterocolitis in 1 patient and dermatitis over the sacral area caused by the bolus effect of the treatment table in the second patient. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative IMRT-SIB without dose escalation is well tolerated, with a low acute toxicity profile, and can achieve a high rate of pCR and downstaging.

Gangrenous appendicitis presenting as acute abdominal pain in a patient on automated peritoneal dialysis: a case report.

INTRODUCTION: Presentations of abdominal pain in patients on peritoneal dialysis deserve maximal attention and careful differential diagnosis on admittance to medical care. In this case report a gangrenous appendicitis in a patient on automated peritoneal dialysis is presented. CASE PRESENTATION: We report the case of a 38-year-old Caucasian man with end-stage renal disease who was on automated peritoneal dialysis and developed acute abdominal pain and cloudy peritoneal dialysate. Negative microbiological cultures of the peritoneal dialysis fluid and an abdominal ultrasonography misleadingly led to a diagnosis of culture negative peritonitis. It was decided to remove the peritoneal catheter but the clinical situation of the patient did not improve. An explorative laparotomy was then carried out; diffuse peritonitis and gangrenous appendicitis were found. An appendectomy was performed. Myocardial infarction and sepsis developed, and the outcome was fatal. CONCLUSION: A peritoneal dialysis patient with abdominal pain that persists for more than 48 hours after the usual antibiotic protocol for peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis should immediately alert the physician to the possibility of peritonitis caused by intra-abdominal pathology. Not only peritoneal catheter removal is indicated in patients whose clinical features worsen or fail to resolve with the established intra-peritoneal antibiotic therapy but, after 72 hours, an early laparoscopy should be done and in a case of correct indication (intra-abdominal pathology) an early explorative laparotomy.