[An unusual presentation of superior vena cava syndrome]. / Une présentation inhabituelle de syndrome de la veine cave supérieure.

Superior vena cava syndrome (SVCS) is a clinical picture resulting from the obstruction of superior vena cava. SVCS usually causes symptoms and signs related to the head, the neck, the upper extremities and the upper thorax. We report a case of unusual clinical presentation of SVCS in a 25-year-old male patient who suffered from lymphoblastic lymphoma in childhood. Clinicians should be aware of abdominal wall presentations of SVCS especially in patients having undergone central venous catheterization, even years before. SVCS could be an emergency situation, requiring specific treatment or contraindicating surgical procedures.

Le syndrome de la veine cave supérieure (SVCS) est une entité nosologique résultant de l'obstruction de la veine cave supérieure. Un SVCS comporte habituellement des symptômes et des signes cliniques localisés à la région cranio-cervicale, aux membres supérieurs et au niveau thoracique supérieur. Nous rapportons un cas de présentation clinique inhabituelle de SVCS chez un patient de 25 ans aux antécédents de lymphome lymphoblastique dans l'enfance. En pratique clinique, il est important de garder à l'esprit l'existence de présentations inhabituelles pariétales abdominales de SVCS, en particulier chez les patients ayant subi un cathétérisme veineux central, même plusieurs années auparavant. Un SVCS peut nécessiter un traitement spécifique, parfois en urgence et contre-indiquer certaines interventions chirurgicales.

Rectal cancer treatment in a teaching hospital.

BACKGROUND: Rectal adenocarcinomas surgery morbidity and mortality might be impaired by neoadjuvant therapy. We performed this retropsective study to be compared with the PROCARE study running afterwards. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 95 patients operated on for rectal adenocarcinoma in a single institution during the period of 2007-2009. We used logistic regression to estimate the relationship between possible predictive parameters of anastomotic leakage (AL). RESULTS: The laparoscopic approach is favored in 63.1% of the cases with a conversion rate of 11.6%, mainly in man (6 out of 7). For low rectal cancer though, laparotomy was the first choice (92.3%). From a carcinological point of view, laparoscopy allowed a complete tumor resection according to the PME (n = 27) and TME (n = 26) standards. Multivariate analysis revealed that women, lower BMI, lower rectum tumor, laparoscopic surgery, neoadjuvant treatment and anal suture were associated with higher risk of AL. The mean hospital stay was 15.4 days (3-46 days) with an in-hospital mortality rate of 3.1%. Adjuvant chemotherapy was completed in 42.1% of the patients. Despite these treatments, we registered a recurrence rate of 26.6%. Of these, 72% were distally localized and 12% exclusively locally. Among the patients operated on by laparoscopy, there was one local recurrence and one local with distant metastases (3.7%). The one- and three-year survival rates were 91.5% and 80.4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed a higher rate of AL than expected (18%). In our series recorded in PROCARE-Home, our leak rate has dropped to 10%. It may be indicating a positive effect of PROCARE.

Multi-centre European experience with intragastric balloon in overweight populations: 13 years of experience.

BACKGROUND: The request to lose weight is expanding not only in obese and morbidly obese patients but also in overweight patients affected by co-morbidities as diabetes and hypertension and who do not tolerate diet regimen or lifestyle changes. The aim of this study is a multicenter evaluation of outcomes of intragastric balloon in overweight patients. METHODS: Patients (BMI 27-30 kg/m2) treated with a BioEnterics Intragastric Balloon (BIB) between 1996 and 2010 were extracted from the database of the participating centres in Rome (Italy), Liège (Belgium) and Madrid (Spain). Primary endpoints were the efficacy and safety at 6 and 42 months from balloon positioning. Secondary endpoints included resolution of co-morbidities. RESULTS: A total of 261 patients were included in this study. The most common indication for balloon placement was a psychological disorder (54%). Mean body mass index (BMI) fell from 28.6 ± 0.4 at baseline to 25.4 ± 2.6 kg/m2 at 6 months and to 27.0 ± 3.1 kg/m2 at 3 years from BIB removal. The mean %EWL was 55.6% at 6 months and 29.1% at 3 years. Forty-seven patients (18%) had complications associated with placement of the intragastric balloon (leak = 28, intolerance = 14, duodenal ulcer = 2, gastritis = 1, oesophagitis = 1, duodenal polyps = 1). The rate of patients with hypertension decreased from 29% at baseline to 16% at 3 years. Diabetes decreased from 15 to 10%, dyslipidaemia decreased from 20 to 18%, hypercholesterolaemia decreased from 32 to 21% and osteoarthropathy decreased from 25 to 13%. CONCLUSIONS: The intragastric balloon is safe and effective in overweight patients, helping to reduce progression to obesity and decreasing the prevalence of a number of important co-morbidities.