Using CT-Based Pelvimetry and Visceral Obesity Measurements to Predict Total Mesorectal Excision Quality for Patients Undergoing Rectal Cancer Surgery.

BACKGROUND: A complete total mesorectal excision is the criterion standard in curative rectal cancer surgery. Ensuring quality is challenging in a narrow pelvis, and obesity amplifies technical difficulties. Pelvimetry is the measurement of pelvic dimensions, but its role in gauging preoperatively the difficulty of proctectomy is largely unexplored. OBJECTIVE: To determine pelvic structural factors associated with incomplete total mesorectal excision after curative proctectomy and build a predictive model for total mesorectal excision quality. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A quaternary referral center database of patients diagnosed with rectal adenocarcinoma (2009-2017). PATIENTS: Curative-intent proctectomy for rectal adenocarcinoma. INTERVENTIONS: All radiological measurements were obtained from preoperative CT images using validated imaging processing software tools. Completeness of total mesorectal excision was obtained from histology reports. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Ability of radiological pelvimetry and obesity measurements to predict total mesorectal excision quality. RESULTS: Of the 410 cases meeting inclusion criteria, 362 underwent a complete total mesorectal excision (88%). Multivariable regression identified a deeper sacral curve (per 100 mm 2 [OR: 1.14; 95% CI, 1.06-1.23; p < 0.001]) and a greater transverse distance of the pelvic outlet (per 10 mm [OR:1.41, 95% CI, 1.08-1.84; p = 0.012]) to be independently associated with incomplete total mesorectal excision. An increased area of the pelvic inlet (per 10 cm 2 [OR: 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.97; p = 0.02) was associated with a higher rate of complete mesorectal excision. No difference in visceral obesity ratio and visceral obesity (ratio >0.4 vs <0.4) between BMI (<30 vs ≥30) and sex was identified. A model was built to predict mesorectal quality using the following variables: depth of sacral curve, area of pelvic inlet, and transverse distance of the pelvic outlet. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective analysis is not controlled for the choice of surgical approach. CONCLUSIONS: Pelvimetry predicts total mesorectal excision quality in rectal cancer surgery and can alert surgeons preoperatively to cases of unusual difficulty. This predictive model may contribute to treatment strategy and aid in the comparison of outcomes between traditional and novel techniques of total mesorectal excision. See Video Abstract . USO DE MEDICIONES DE PELVIMETRA Y OBESIDAD VISCERAL BASADAS EN TC PARA PREDECIR LA CALIDAD DE TME EN PACIENTES SOMETIDOS A CIRUGA DE CNCER DE RECTO: ANTECEDENTES:Una escisión mesorrectal total y completa es el estándar de oro en la cirugía curativa del cáncer de recto. Garantizar la calidad es un desafío en una pelvis estrecha y la obesidad amplifica las dificultades técnicas. La pelvimetría es la medición de las dimensiones pélvicas, pero su papel para medir la dificultad preoperatoria de la proctectomía está en gran medida inexplorado.OBJETIVO:Determinar los factores estructurales pélvicos asociados con la escisión mesorrectal total incompleta después de una proctectomía curativa y construir un modelo predictivo para la calidad de la escisión mesorrectal total.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ÁMBITO:Base de datos de un centro de referencia cuaternario de pacientes diagnosticados con adenocarcinoma de recto (2009-2017).PACIENTES:Proctectomía con intención curativa para adenocarcinoma de recto.INTERVENCIONES:Todas las mediciones radiológicas se obtuvieron a partir de imágenes de TC preoperatorias utilizando herramientas de software de procesamiento de imágenes validadas. La integridad de la escisión mesorrectal total se obtuvo a partir de informes histológicos.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACIÓN:Capacidad de la pelvimetría radiológica y las mediciones de obesidad para predecir la calidad total de la escisión mesorrectal.RESULTADOS:De los 410 casos que cumplieron los criterios de inclusión, 362 tuvieron una escisión mesorrectal total completa (88%). Una regresión multivariable identificó una curva sacra más profunda (por 100 mm2); OR:1,14,[IC95%:1,06-1,23,p<0,001], y mayor distancia transversal de salida pélvica (por 10mm); OR:1,41, [IC 95%:1,08-1,84,p=0,012] como asociación independiente con escisión mesorrectal total incompleta. Un área aumentada de entrada pélvica (por 10 cm2); OR:0,85, [IC95%:0,75-0,97,p=0,02] se asoció con una mayor tasa de escisión mesorrectal completa. No se identificaron diferencias en la proporción de obesidad visceral y la obesidad visceral (proporción>0,4 vs.<0,4) entre el índice de masa corporal (<30 vs.>=30) o el sexo. Se construyó un modelo para predecir la calidad mesorrectal utilizando variables: profundidad de la curva sacra, área de la entrada pélvica y distancia transversal de la salida pélvica.LIMITACIONES:Análisis retrospectivo no controlado por la elección del abordaje quirúrgico.CONCLUSIONES:La pelvimetría predice la calidad de la escisión mesorrectal total en la cirugía del cáncer de recto y puede alertar a los cirujanos preoperatoriamente sobre casos de dificultad inusual. Este modelo predictivo puede contribuir a la estrategia de tratamiento y ayudar en la comparación de resultados entre técnicas tradicionales y novedosas de escisión mesorrectal total. (Traducción- Dr. Ingrid Melo).

Establishing the clinical relevance of grade A post-hepatectomy liver failure.

INTRODUCTION: The International Study Group of Liver Surgery's criteria stratifies post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) into grades A, B, and C. The clinical significance of these grades has not been fully established. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) hepatectomy-targeted database was analyzed. Outcomes between patients without PHLF, with grade A PHLF, and grade B or C PHLF were compared. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression were performed. RESULTS: Six thousand two hundred seventy-four adults undergoing elective major hepatectomy were included in the analysis. The incidence of grade A PHLF was 4.3% and grade B or C was 5.3%. Mortality was similar between patients without PHLF (1.2%) and with grade A PHLF (1.1%), but higher in those with grades B or C PHLF (25.4%). Overall morbidities rates were 19.3%, 41.7%, and 72.8% in patients without PHLF, with grade A PHLF, and with grade B or C PHLF, respectively (p < 0.001). Grade A PHLF was associated with increased morbidity (grade A: odds ratios [OR] 2.7 [95% CI: 2.0-3.5]), unplanned reoperation (grade A: OR 3.4 [95% CI: 2.2-5.1]), nonoperative intervention (grade A: OR 2.6 [95% CI: 1.9-3.6]), length of stay (grade A: OR 3.1 [95% CI: 2.3-4.1]), and readmission (grade A: OR 1.8 [95% CI: 1.3-2.5]) compared to patients without PHLF. CONCLUSIONS: Although mortality was similar between patients without PHLF and with grade A PHLF, other postoperative outcomes were notably inferior. Grade A PHLF is a clinically distinct entity with relevant associated postoperative morbidity.

Utilization of neoadjuvant therapy for localized gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors and the association with survival.

BACKGROUND: For gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), neoadjuvant imatinib is most often reserved for tumors near the gastroesophageal junction, multivisceral involvement, or limited metastatic disease. Whether localized gastric GISTs benefit from neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) remains unknown. We sought to examine factors associated with NAT utilization for localized gastric GISTs and evaluate implications on survival. METHODS: The National Cancer Database identified patients with localized gastric GISTs treated with NAT (2010-2020), excluding tumors extending beyond the gastric wall, located in the cardia, or with metastatic disease. Multivariable logistic regression assessed characteristics of NAT use. After 1:1 propensity score matching, Kaplan-Meier methods and multivariable Cox regression assessed overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 7203 patients, 762 (10.6%) received NAT followed by resection. On multivariable analysis, increasing tumor size was associated with NAT use (<2.0 cm vs 2.0-5.0 cm [odds ratio {OR}, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.19-3.47; P = .010] vs >5 cm [OR, 16.87; 95% CI, 10.02-28.40; P < .001]). After propensity score matching, 1506 patients remained. Median OS for NAT was 46.0 months vs 43.0 months for resection (P = .059), which was independently predictive of improved survival on multivariable analysis (hazard ratio [HR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80-0.99; P = .041). Subgroup analysis by tumor size showed no survival differences for tumors <2.0 cm or from 2.0 to 5.0 cm. Median OS was higher for tumors > 5.0 cm treated with NAT (NAT, 45.4 months [IQR, 29.5-65.9] vs upfront resection, 42.3 months [IQR 26.9-62.8]) and associated with improved survival on multivariable analysis (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.78-0.99; P = .040). CONCLUSION: Although patients who received NAT had improved survival, this was primarily due to tumors >5.0 cm. Expanding NAT selection criteria to include localized gastric GISTs >5.0 cm may improve outcomes and warrants investigation through clinical trials.