The Role of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy in the Management of Merkel Cell Carcinoma with Clinically Detected Regional Lymph Node Metastasis.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy is emerging as a promising option for certain locally advanced and metastatic cutaneous malignancies. However, the role of neoadjuvant immunotherapy (NIO) in Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) with clinically detected regional lymph node metastasis (CDRLNM) has not been fully elucidated. METHODS: For this study, MCC patients with CDRLNM who underwent surgical excision were selected from the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Those who received NIO were propensity-matched with those who did not, and Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of the 1809 selected patients, 356 (19.7%) received NIO followed by wide excision (n = 352, 98.9%) or amputation (n = 4, 1.1%). The rate of complete pathologic response for the primary tumor (ypT0) was 45.2%. Only 223 patents (63.4%) also underwent lymph node dissection (LND). The complete pathologic nodal response (ypN0) rate for these patients was 17.9%. A pathologic complete response of both the primary tumor and the nodal basin (ypT0 ypN0) was seen in 16 of the 223 patients who underwent both primary tumor surgery and LND. Subsequently, 151 pairs were matched between the NIO and no-NIO groups (including only patients with LND). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a significant OS improvement with NIO (median not reached vs. 35.0 ± 8.0 months; p = 0.025). The 5-year OS was 57% in the NIO group versus 44% in no-NIO group (p = 0.021). CONCLUSION: The study suggests that NIO in MCC with CDRLNM provides improved OS in addition to promising rates of primary complete response, which could change the profile of surgical resection. This supports ongoing clinical trials exploring the use of NIO in MCC.

The association of permanent versus absorbable fixation on developing chronic post-herniorrhaphy groin pain in patients undergoing laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.

INTRODUCTION: Fixation of mesh during minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair is thought to contribute to chronic post-herniorrhaphy groin pain (CGP). In contrast to permanent tacks, absorbable tacks are hypothesized to minimize the likelihood of CGP. This study aimed to compare the rates of CGP after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair between absorbable versus permanent fixation at maximum follow-up. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial in patients undergoing laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (NCT03835351). All patients were contacted at maximum follow-up after surgery to administer EuraHS quality of life (QoL) surveys. The pain and restriction of activity subdomains of the survey were utilized. The primary outcome was rate of CGP, as defined by a EuraHS QoL pain domain score ≥ 4 measured at ≥ 1 year postoperatively. The secondary outcomes were pain and restriction of activity domain scores and hernia recurrence at maximum follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 338 patients were contacted at a mean follow-up of 28 ± 11 months. 181 patients received permanent tacks and 157 patients received absorbable tacks during their repair. At maximum follow-up, the rates of CGP (27 [15%] vs 28 [18%], P = 0.47), average pain scores (1.78 ± 4.38 vs 2.32 ± 5.40, P = 0.22), restriction of activity scores (1.39 ± 4.32 vs 2.48 ± 7.45, P = 0.18), and the number of patients who reported an inguinal bulge (18 [9.9%] vs 15 [9.5%], P = 0.9) were similar between patients with permanent versus absorbable tacks. On multivariable analysis, there was no significant difference in the odds of CGP between the two groups (OR 1.23, 95% CI [0.60, 2.50]). CONCLUSION: Mesh fixation with permanent tacks does not appear to increase the risk of CGP after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair when compared to fixation with absorbable tacks. Prospective trials are needed to further evaluate this relationship.

Does reusable mean green? Comparison of the environmental impact of reusable operating room bed covers and lift sheets versus single-use.

INTRODUCTION: As hospitals strive to reduce their environmental footprint, there is an ongoing debate over the environmental implications of reusable versus disposable linens in operating rooms (ORs). This research aimed to compare the environmental impact of reusable versus single-use OR bed covers and lift sheets using life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology. METHODS: LCA is an established tool with rigorous methodology that uses science-based processes to measure environmental impact. This study compared the impacts of three independent system scenarios at a single large academic hospital: reusable bed covers with 50 laundry cycles and subsequent landfill disposal (System 1), single-use bed covers with waste landfill disposal (System 2), and single-use bed covers with waste disposal using incineration (System 3). RESULTS: The total carbon footprint of System 1 for 50 uses was 19.83 â€‹kg carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2-eq). System 2 generated 64.99 â€‹kg CO2-eq. For System 3, the total carbon footprint was 108.98 â€‹kg CO2-eq. The raw material extraction for all the material to produce an equivalent 50 single-use OR bed cover kits was tenfold more carbon-intensive than the reusable bed cover. Laundering one reusable OR bed cover 50 times was more carbon intensive (12.12 â€‹kg CO2-eq) than landfill disposal of 50 single-use OR bed covers (2.52 â€‹kg CO2-eq). DISCUSSION: Our analysis demonstrates that one reusable fabric-based OR bed cover laundered 50 times, despite the carbon and water-intensive laundering process, exhibits a markedly lower carbon footprint than its single-use counterparts. The net difference is 45.16 â€‹kg CO2-eq, equivalent to driving 115 miles in an average gasoline-powered passenger vehicle. This stark contrast underscores the efficacy of adopting reusable solutions to mitigate environmental impact within healthcare facilities.