Significant Predictors of Postoperative Morbidity After Radical Resection of Retroperitoneal Sarcoma in a Tertiary Center.

BACKGROUND: The safety of multivisceral resection of retroperitoneal sarcoma is an issue. Previous reports have investigated its associations with the pattern of resection and factors recognized mostly per operatively. METHODS: All consecutive RPS resections from May 2015 to April 2022 were studied retrospectively with respect to adverse events. Two univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate the associations between severe adverse events and factors recognized pre- and per operatively. Associations of adverse events with overall survival (OS) and local recurrence (LR) were investigated. RESULTS: A total of 265 surgical interventions corresponding to 251 patients were recorded (38 RPS surgeries/year). Severe postoperative adverse events (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3) occurred in 50 patients (18.9%), 15 (5.6%) patients underwent an iterative laparotomy, and 6 patients (2.3%) died within 90 days. On multivariate analysis including all parameters known preoperatively, male sex, performance status, dedifferentiated liposarcoma histology, and low serum albumin level were found to be significant predictors of major complications, whereas the timing of surgery and preoperative treatment were not. On univariate analysis including all per operative parameters, transfusion requirement, operative time, number of digestive anastomoses, and pancreas and/or major arterial resection were found to entail higher operative risk. On multivariate analysis, only transfusion requirement was significant. There was no impact of postoperative adverse events on OS or LR. CONCLUSIONS: The recognition of preoperative parameters that impact safety could mitigate the extent of the surgery, specifically the resection of adherent organs not overtly invaded. For the best decision, this surgery should be performed in referral centers.

Patient satisfaction and acceptance of their totally implanted central venous catheter: a French prospective multicenter study.

INTRODUCTION: Most cancer patients require a totally implanted central venous catheter (TIVAD) for their treatment. In a previous study, we developed and validated a questionnaire dubbed QASICC (Questionnaire for Acceptance of, and Satisfaction with, Implanted Central Venous Catheter) assessing patient satisfaction with, and acceptance of, their TIVAD. In the present study, we conducted a large, prospective, multicenter study in cancer patients aimed to analyze factors that could influence patients' acceptance of, and satisfaction with, their device. METHODS: The QASICC is composed of 22 items assessing 5 dimensions. The construction and validation of the questionnaire was achieved using validated methodology to determine its psychometric characteristics. The questionnaire was submitted to 720 patients in 11 French institutions; 567 answers were analyzed. RESULTS: Younger patients had the most difficulties in coping with their TIVAD, especially regarding daily activities and their body image and private life compared to older patients. Sex was significantly related to patient satisfaction, with worse scores in women. Breast tumor location was also correlated with low TIVAD acceptance. TIVAD on the right side also positively influenced satisfaction and acceptance of the device. CONCLUSIONS: QASICC has proved to be efficient, and to detect known issues regarding daily activities and body image. As our population was mostly composed of women with breast cancer, our results reflect specific aspects of this population. The TIVAD remains generally well-accepted and our questionnaire should help health-care workers to better address the specific needs of their patients based on the answers provided.

[Multicenter validation study of a questionnaire assessing patient satisfaction with and acceptance of totally-implanted central venous access devices]. / Validation multicentrique d'un questionnaire évaluant l'acceptation et la satisfaction des patients porteurs de chambre à cathéter implantable : le questionnaire QASICC.

OBJECTIVE: Most cancer patients require a totally-implanted central venous access device (TIVAD) for their treatment. This was a prospective, multicenter, open study to: (i) develop and validate a French-language questionnaire dubbed QASICC (Questionnaire for Acceptance of and Satisfaction with Implanted Central Venous Catheter) assessing patient's satisfaction with and acceptance of their TIVAD; (ii) develop a mean score of patient's acceptance and satisfaction; (iii) look for correlation between QASICC score and TIVAD patient/tumor pathology/device characteristics. METHODS: From 2011 November to 2012 December, the first version of the QASICC questionnaire that included 27 questions assessing seven dimensions was re-tested among 998 cancer patients in eleven French cancer hospitals (eight cancer research institutes and three university/general hospitals). The goal was: (i) to reduce the questionnaire item and dimension number (pertinency, saturation effect, item correlation); (ii) to assess its psychometric properties, demonstrate its validity and independency compared to (EORTC) QLQC30; (iii) to correlate clinical and pathological patient's/tumor's/TIVAD's parameters with the QASICC questionnaire score (the higher the overall score, the greater the acceptance and satisfaction). The questionnaire was administered to the patient 30 days (±15 days) after TIVAD's implantation. RESULTS: Among 998 questionnaires given to cancer patients, 658 were analyzed and 464 were fully assessed as there was no missing data. Time to fill-in the questionnaire was five minutes in 90% patients. Final QASICC tool included twenty-two questions assessing four homogeneous dimensions (65%

Ziconotide adverse events in patients with cancer pain: a multicenter observational study of a slow titration, multidrug protocol.

BACKGROUND: Ziconotide is a new analgesic agent administered intrathecally. It is challenging to use and can induce several and sometimes serious adverse events. A low initial dosage followed by slow titration may reduce serious adverse events. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a low starting dosage of ziconotide, followed by slow titration, decreases the incidence of major adverse events associated with ziconotide when used for intractable cancer pain. STUDY DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: Three French cancer centers. METHODS: Patients with incurable cancer causing chronic pain rated above 6/10 on a numerical scale while receiving high-dose opioid therapy (more than 200 mg/d of oral morphine equivalent) and/or exhibiting severe opioid-related adverse events received intrathecal infusions of ziconotide combined with morphine, ropivacaine, and clonidine. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients were included. Adverse events were recorded in 57% of them; moderate adverse events occurred in 51%. Adverse events required treatment discontinuation in 7 (9%) including 5 (6%) for whom a causal role for ziconotide was highly likely; among them 4 (5%) were serious. All patients experienced a significant and lasting decrease in pain intensity (by 48%) in response to intrathecal analgesic therapy that included ziconotide. LIMITATIONS: Limitations include the nonrandomized, observational nature of the study. Determining the relative contributions of each drug to adverse events was difficult, and some of the adverse events manifested as clinical symptoms of a subjective nature. CONCLUSIONS: The rates of minor and moderate adverse events were consistent with previous reports. However, the rate of serious adverse events was substantially lower. Our study confirms the efficacy of intrathecal analgesia with ziconotide for relieving refractory cancer pain. These results indicate that multimodal intrathecal analgesia in patients with cancer pain should include ziconotide from the outset in order to provide time for subsequent slow titration.