Survival and safety after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or upfront surgery for locally advanced colon cancer: meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is increasingly used to treat locally advanced (T3-4 Nx-2 M0) colon cancer due to its potential advantages over the standard approach of upfront surgery. The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyse data from comparative studies to assess the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on oncological outcomes. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted by searching the MEDLINE and Scopus databases. The search encompassed RCTs, propensity score-matched studies, and controlled prospective studies published up to 1 April 2023. As a primary objective, overall survival and disease-free survival were compared. As a secondary objective, perioperative morbidity, mortality, and complete resection were compared using the DerSimonian and Laird models. RESULTS: A total of seven studies comprising a total of 2120 patients were included. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a reduction in the hazard of recurrence (HR 0.73, 95% c.i. 0.59 to 0.90; P = 0.003) and death (HR 0.67, 95% c.i. 0.54 to 0.83; P < 0.001) compared with upfront surgery. Additionally, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was significantly associated with higher 5-year overall survival (79.9% versus 72.6%; P < 0.001) and disease-free survival (73.1% versus 64.5%; P = 0.028) rates. No significant differences were observed in perioperative mortality (OR 0.97, 95% c.i. 0.28 to 3.33), overall complications (OR 0.95, 95% c.i. 0.77 to 1.16), or anastomotic leakage/intra-abdominal abscess (OR 0.88, 95% c.i. 0.60 to 1.29). However, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a lower risk of incomplete resection (OR 0.70, 95% c.i. 0.49 to 0.99). CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is associated with a reduced hazard of recurrence and death, as well as improved overall survival and disease-free survival rates, compared with upfront surgery in patients with locally advanced colon cancer.

Colon cancer is a common medical condition, the established treatment for which involves surgical resection followed by chemotherapy. However, a contemporary shift has led to the investigation of an alternative treatment sequence known as neoadjuvant chemotherapy, wherein chemotherapy precedes the surgery. This study critically assesses the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared with the standard treatment approach of surgery followed by chemotherapy. A systematic review of medical databases was undertaken to identify pertinent research publications on this subject matter. In total, seven studies encompassing data from 2120 patients were included in the analysis. Employing a meta-analysis methodology to synthesize the collective data from these studies, it was revealed that neoadjuvant chemotherapy was linked to higher rates of 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival, alongside a diminished hazard of both recurrence and death. Furthermore, no discernible differences in surgical complications or perioperative mortality were evident across the compared approaches.

The Impact of Portal Hypertension Assessment Method on the Outcomes of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Resection: A Meta-Analysis of Matched Cohort and Prospective Studies.

OBJECTIVE: Examine portal hypertension (PHT) impact on postoperative and survival outcomes in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients after liver resection (LR), specifically exploring distinctions between indirect signs and invasive measurements of PHT. BACKGROUND: PHT has historically discouraged LR in individuals with HCC due to the elevated risk of morbidity, including liver decompensation (LD). METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using 3 databases to identify prospective-controlled and matched cohort studies until December 28, 2022. Focus on comparing postoperative outcomes (mortality, morbidity, and liver-related complications) and overall survival in HCC patients with and without PHT undergoing LR. Three meta-analysis models were utilized: for aggregated data (fixed-effects inverse variance model), for patient-level survival data (one-stage frequentist meta-analysis with gamma-shared frailty Cox proportional hazards model), and for pooled data (Freeman-Tukey exact and double arcsine method). RESULTS: Nine studies involving 1124 patients were analyzed. Indirect signs of PHT were not significantly associated with higher mortality, overall complications, PHLF or LD. However, LR in patients with hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) ≥10 mm Hg significantly increased the risk of overall complications, PHLF, and LD. Despite elevated risks, the procedure resulted in a 5-year overall survival rate of 55.2%. Open LR significantly increased the risk of overall complications, PHLF, and LD. Conversely, PHT did not show a significant association with worse postoperative outcomes in minimally invasive LR. CONCLUSIONS: LR in the presence of indirect signs of PHT poses no increased risk of complications. Yet, in HVPG ≥10 mm Hg patients, LR increases overall morbidity and liver-related complications risk. Transjugular HVPG assessment is crucial for LR decisions. Minimally invasive approach seems to be vital for favorable outcomes, especially in HVPG ≥10 mm Hg patients.

Surgery and radioembolization of liver tumors.

Surgical resection is considered the curative treatment par excellence for patients with primary or metastatic liver tumors. However, less than 40% of them are candidates for surgery, either due to non-modifiable factors (comorbidities, age, liver dysfunction…), or to the invasion or proximity of the tumor to the main vascular requirements, the lack of a future liver remnant (FLR) adequate to maintain postoperative liver function, or criteria of tumor size and number. In these last factors, hepatic radioembolization has been shown to play a role as a presurgical tool, either by hypertrophy of the FLR or by reducing tumor size that manages to reduce tumor staging (term known as "downstaging"). To these is added a third factor, which is its ability to apply the test of time, which makes it possible to identify those patients who present progression of the disease in a short period of time (both locally and at distance), avoiding a unnecessary surgery. This paper aims to review RE as a tool to facilitate liver surgery, both through the experience of our center and the available scientific evidence.

Association of Laparoscopic Surgery with Improved Perioperative and Survival Outcomes in Patients with Resectable Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis from Propensity-Score Matched Studies.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have associated laparoscopic surgery with better overall survival (OS) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). The potential benefits of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) over open liver resection (OLR) have not been demonstrated in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCC). METHODS: A systematic review of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases was performed to search studies comparing OS and perioperative outcome for patients with resectable iCC. Propensity-score matched (PSM) studies published from database inception to May 1, 2022 were eligible. A frequentist, patient-level, one-stage meta-analysis was performed to analyze the differences in OS between LLR and OLR. Second, intraoperative, postoperative, and oncological outcomes were compared between the two approaches by using a random-effects DerSimonian-Laird model. RESULTS: Six PSM studies involving data from 1.042 patients (530 OLR vs. 512 LLR) were included. LLR in patients with resectable iCC was found to significantly decrease the hazard of death (stratified hazard ratio [HR]: 0.795 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.638-0.992]) compared with OLR. Moreover, LLR appears to be significantly associated with a decrease in intraoperative bleeding (- 161.47 ml [95% CI - 237.26 to - 85.69 ml]) and transfusion (OR = 0.41 [95% CI 0.26-0.69]), as well as with a shorter hospital stay (- 3.16 days [95% CI - 4.98 to - 1.34]) and a lower rate of major (Clavien-Dindo ≥III) complications (OR = 0.60 [95% CI 0.39-0.93]). CONCLUSIONS: This large meta-analysis of PSM studies shows that LLR in patients with resectable iCC is associated with improved perioperative outcomes and, being conservative, yields similar OS outcomes compared with OLR.

Liver Resection and Transplantation Following Yttrium-90 Radioembolization for Primary Malignant Liver Tumors: A 15-Year Single-Center Experience.

Radioembolization (RE) may help local control and achieve tumor reduction while hypertrophies healthy liver and provides a test of time. For liver transplant (LT) candidates, it may attain downstaging for initially non-candidates and bridging during the waitlist. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with HCC and ICC treated by RE with further liver resection (LR) or LT between 2005-2020 were included. All patients selected were discarded for the upfront surgical approach for not accomplishing oncological or surgical safety criteria after a multidisciplinary team assessment. Data for clinicopathological details, postoperative, and survival outcomes were retrospectively reviewed from a prospectively maintained database. RESULTS: A total of 34 patients underwent surgery following RE (21 LR and 13 LT). Clavien-Dindo grade III-IV complications and mortality rates were 19.0% and 9.5% for LR and 7.7% and 0% for LT, respectively. After RE, for HCC and ICC patients in the LR group, 10-year OS rates were 57% and 60%, and 10-year DFS rates were 43.1% and 60%, respectively. For HCC patients in the LT group, 10-year OS and DFS rates from RE were 51.3% and 43.3%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Liver resection after RE is safe and feasible with optimal short-term outcomes. Patients diagnosed with unresectable or high biological risk HCC or ICC, treated with RE, and rescued by LR may achieve optimal global and DFS rates. On the other hand, bridging or downstaging strategies to LT with RE in HCC patients show adequate recurrence rates as well as long-term survival.

Pure laparoscopic major liver resection after yttrium90 radioembolization: a case-matched series analysis of feasibility and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Liver surgery after radioembolization (RE) entails highly demanding and challenging procedures due to the frequent combination of large tumors, severe RE-related adhesions, and the necessity of conducting major hepatectomies. Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and its associated advantages could provide benefits, as yet unreported, to these patients. The current study evaluated feasibility, morbidity, mortality, and survival outcomes for major laparoscopic liver resection after radioembolization. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this retrospective, single-center study patients diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma or metastases from colorectal cancer undergoing major laparoscopic hepatectomy after RE were identified from institutional databases. They were matched (1:2) on several pre-operative characteristics to a group of patients that underwent major LLR for the same malignancies during the same period but without previous RE. RESULTS: From March 2011 to November 2020, 9 patients underwent a major LLR after RE. No differences were observed in intraoperative blood loss (50 vs. 150 ml; p = 0.621), operative time (478 vs. 407 min; p = 0.135) or pedicle clamping time (90.5 vs 74 min; p = 0.133) between the post-RE LLR and the matched group. Similarly, no differences were observed on hospital stay (median 3 vs. 4 days; p = 0.300), Clavien-Dindo ≥ III complications (2 vs. 1 cases; p = 0.250), specific liver morbidity (1 vs. 1 case p = 1.000), or 90 day mortality (0 vs. 0; p = 1.000). CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic approach for post radioembolization patients may be a feasible and safe procedure with excellent surgical and oncological outcomes and meets the current standards for laparoscopic liver resections. Further studies with larger series are needed to confirm the results herein presented.

Critical stenosis of the celiac trunk by the arcuate ligament, successfully treated by a laparoscopic approach.

A 56-year-old female was referred to our department with a five-month history of progressive abdominal pain related to physical exertion and copious meals. The pain was located in the mesogastric region and the right flank and remitted when the patient lay in the recumbent position with the knees bent. The patient reported nausea and a weight loss of 12 kg over the previous ten years. She had been diagnosed 18 years previously with hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cancer and had undergone a hysterectomy and partial nephrectomy.

Pancreatic injury and acute pancreatitis in COVID-19 patients.

Apart from pulmonary manifestations, there is an increased incidence of pancreatic involvement and acute pancreatitis (AP) reported in COVID-19 patients. In January 2021, a PubMed search using the terms "Acute Pancreatitis, COVID-19" yielded a result including 94 studies. Most of the studies refer to isolated cases or limited series, with the added difficulty that some authors have considered AP as elevated lipase and/or amylase levels without the diagnostic criteria for AP being met, as highlighted by Chivato et al. in relation to the case they report. Pancreatic involvement has been reported in 17 % of COVID-19 patients and AP in 1.8-2.0 % of these patients.

Severe colon ischemia in patients with severe coronavirus-19 (COVID-19)

COVID-19 is associated with severe coagulopathy. We present three cases of colonic ischemia that can be attributed to the hypercoagulable state related with SARS-CoV2 and disseminated intravascular coagulation. Three males aged 76, 68 and 56 with respiratory distress presented episodes of rectal bleeding, abdominal distension and signs of peritoneal irritation. Endoscopy (case 1) and computed tomography angiography revealed colonic ischemia. One patient (case 2) in which a computed tomography (CT) scan showed perforation of the gangrenous cecum underwent surgery. D-dimer levels were markedly increased (2,170, 2,100 and 7,360 ng/ml) in all three patients. All three patients died shortly after diagnosis

No disponible

EVALUATION OF A TELEMEDICINE MODEL TO FOLLOW UP PATIENTS WITH EXUDATIVE AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION.

PURPOSE: To evaluate a telemedicine model to follow up patients with exudative age-related macular degeneration and compare the time spent using this model with the time spent conducting office examinations. METHODS: Results of office and telemedicine evaluations were compared to determine whether patients with exudative age-related macular degeneration previously treated with intravitreal injections needed additional treatment. The office examinations included visual acuity measurement, fundus examination, and optical coherence tomography. The telemedicine evaluation included evaluation of retinography images, optical coherence tomography images, and visual acuity data obtained in the office. We also measured the time spent on telemedicine evaluations and compared it with the time spent on office examinations. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were included. A comparison of office and remote diagnostic decisions showed the same results in 181 cases. Among the 20 remaining patients and considering office diagnostic decisions as the gold standard, 17 (8%) patients had false-positive diagnoses and 3 (1%) had false-negative diagnoses. The sensitivity and specificity of the telemedicine evaluations were 96% and 85%, respectively. The average time spent on remote evaluations was 1 minute 21 seconds compared with 10 minutes spent on office examination (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The telemedicine model can be a useful alternative for following up patients with age-related macular degeneration.