A Single-Center, Randomized, Double-Blind Study of 94 Patients Undergoing Surgery for Cerebral Glioma to Compare Postoperative Thromboprophylaxis with and without Rivaroxaban.

BACKGROUND Venous thrombosis (VTE) is a common adverse event among inpatients, which can cause pulmonary embolism, and greatly increases mortality. The effects of rivaroxaban in patients undergoing brain glioma surgery have still not been explored. This single-center study of 94 patients undergoing surgery for cerebral glioma aimed to compare postoperative thromboprophylaxis with and without rivaroxaban. MATERIAL AND METHODS We designed a randomized, controlled, double-blind study to evaluate the effect of rivaroxaban on 94 patients undergoing brain glioma surgery. These patients were divided into a rivaroxaban group (administered at 10 mg per day from admission to discharge) and a placebo group. The primary study endpoint was incidence of VTE at discharge. The secondary endpoints included safety outcomes of major bleeding, allergy, or VTE-related death. RESULTS A total of 94 patients were enrolled in the study: 47 in the rivaroxaban group and 47 in the placebo group. Baseline characteristics of participants were well-matched in both groups. A significant reduction was found in the incidence of VTE in the rivaroxaban treatment group versus the placebo group (1/47 vs 10/47 patients, P=0.008). The rate of major bleeding events was quite low in both group (1/47 vs 1/47 patients). One patient in the placebo group died due to a pulmonary embolism and intractable concomitant underlying diseases. CONCLUSIONS Our results indicate that treatment with rivaroxaban is a safe and effective thromboprophylaxis treatment in patients undergoing surgery for malignant cerebral glioma.

Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary disease: a comprehensive review of literature and meta-analysis of outcomes compared with open surgery.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) has been gradually attempted. However, whether MIPD is superior, equal or inferior to its conventional open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) is not clear. METHODS: Studies published up to May 2017 were searched in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Main outcomes were comprehensively reviewed and measured including conversion to open approach, operation time (OP), estimated blood loss (EBL), transfusion, length of hospital stay (LOS), overall complications, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), readmission, reoperation and reasons of preoperative death, number of retrieved lymph nodes (RLN), surgical margins, recurrence, and survival. The software of Review Manage version 5.1 was used for meta-analysis. RESULTS: One hundred studies were included for systematic review and 26 out of them (totally 3402 cases, 1064 for MIPD, 2338 for OPD) were included for meta-analysis. In the early years, most articles were case reports or non-control case series studies, while in the last 6 years high-volume and comparative researches were increasing gradually. Systematic review revealed conversion rates of MIPD to OPD ranged from 0% to 40%. The mean or median OP of MIPD ranged from 276 to 657 min. The total POPF rates vary between 3.8% and 50% observed in all systematic reviewed studies. Meta-analysis demonstrated MIPD had longer OP (WMD = 99.4 min; 95%CI: 46.0 ~ 152.8, P < 0.01), lower blood loss (WMD = -0.54 ml; 95% CI, -0.88 ~ -0.20 ml; P < 0.01), lower transfusion rate (RR = 0.73, 95%CI: 0.57 ~ 0.94, P = 0.02), shorter LOS (WMD = -3.49 days; 95%CI: -4.83 ~ -2.15, P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in time to oral intake, postoperative complications, POPF, reoperation, readmission, perioperative mortality and number of retrieved lymph nodes. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates MIPD is technically feasible and safety on the basis of historical studies. MIPD is associated with less blood loss, faster postoperative recovery, shorter length of hospitalization and longer operation time. These findings are waiting for being confirmed with robust prospective comparative studies and randomized clinical trials.

Covered Stents versus Uncovered Stents for Unresectable Malignant Biliary Strictures: A Meta-Analysis.

AIM: To summarize the covered or uncovered SEMS for treatment of unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction, comparing the stent patency, patient survival, and incidence of adverse events between the two SEMSs. METHODS: The meta-analysis search was performed independently by two of the authors, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, OVID, and Cochrane databases on all studies between 2010 and 2015. Pooled effect was calculated using either the fixed or the random effects model. RESULTS: Statistics shows that there is no difference between SEMSs in the hazard ratio for patient survival (HR 1.04; 95% CI, 0.92-1.17; P = 0.55) and stent patency (HR 0.87, 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.30, P = 0.5). However, incidence of adverse events (OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.57 to 0.97, P = 0.03) showed significant different results in the covered SEMS, with dysfunctions events (OR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.56 to 1.00, P = 0.05) playing a more important role than complications (OR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.30, P = 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: Covered SEMS group had lower incidence of adverse events. There is no significant difference in dysfunctions, but covered SEMS trends to be better, with no difference in stent patency, patient survival, and complications.

Therapy and prognosis of intracranial invasive olfactory neuroblastoma.

OBJECTIVE: There is currently no consensus on a standardized treatment strategy for olfactory neuroblastoma (ONB), especially for intracranial invasion. This purpose of this study is to explore the appropriate treatment modality and prognostic factors of intracranial invasive ONB. STUDY DESIGN: Case series with chart review. SETTING: The study was conducted at the Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital and the Cancer Center of Sun Yat-sen University, China. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Twenty-five cases of intracranial invasive ONB were collected and investigated using a retrospective review analysis from patients diagnosed between 1980 and 2005. RESULTS: The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates for the group were 55%, 46%, and 31%, respectively. The subgroups who did not receive surgical treatment had worse survival rates than those who did receive treatment. In particular, patients who did not receive any therapy did not live past 1 year. In contrast, the group of patients treated by intranasal resection in combination with radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy showed a slightly better survival rate. It is important to note that the group of patients treated by craniofacial surgery combined with radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy had a markedly favorable prognosis, with 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates of up to 100%, 88%, and 66%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Craniofacial surgery in combination with radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy was an effective treatment for intracranial invasive ONB. In addition, it was found that age may not be an important prognostic factor for intracranial invasive ONB; however, the rate of intracalvarial invasion was found to be a potent marker for predicting the prognosis of patients.