Relationship Between ABO Blood Group and Microsatellite Instability in Colorectal Cancer: A Retrospective Single-Center Study.

PURPOSE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cancer in both women and men. Microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) CRC is a molecular subgroup and has distinct clinical and pathologic features from microsatellite stable (MSS) CRC. Studies have suggested an association between hereditary antigens in ABO blood group system and the risk of developing various cancers but the relationship between blood groups and MSI-H CRC has not been investigated. This study aimed to investigate this relationship and its possible effect on clinicopathological features in patients with CRC. METHODS: This is a retrospective cross-sectional single-center study including pathology-confirmed CRC patients. Demographic and clinicopathological features, blood groups, and microsatellite status were examined among two groups. Microsatellite instability was examined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in pathology specimen. RESULTS: A total of 144 patients, 72 patients with MSI-H CRC and 72 patients with MSS CRC, were included in the study. Among all patients, median age was 61.7 ± 12.9 (range 27-89) and 57.6% were male. MSI-H and MSS groups were similar in terms of age, gender distribution, and comorbidities. Patients with MSI-H CRC had significantly common O-blood group than control group (44.4% vs 18.1%, p: 0.001). In multivariate analysis, O-blood group was 4.2 times more common in the MSI-H patient group (95% CI: 1.514-11.819, p: 0.006). Also patients with MSI-H CRC were found to have significantly more right-sided, high-grade tumors and early-stage disease. CONCLUSIONS: MSI-H CRC is an important subgroup in colon cancer with different molecular and clinicopathological features. It was observed that O-blood group was 4.2 times more common in MSI-H CRC. We believe that clarifying the relationship between microsatellite instability and O-blood group and its possible genetic and epigenetic mechanisms in larger studies will enable us to better understand tumor behavior and prognosis, also affect our treatment choices of these patient groups.

Acute appendicitis during coronavirus disease 2019 in Türkiye: Changes in clinical approach, treatment, and diagnosis modalities: A retrospective and cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in major changes in health-care systems and emer-gency surgical interventions. Here, we examined patients with acute appendicitis who presented to emergency departments and com-pared diagnosis, treatment, and post-treatment processes before and during the pandemic period and investigated how the pandemic affected management of acute appendicitis. METHODS: A national, multicenter, and cohort study model was designed that included patients older than 18 years of age diag-nosed with acute appendicitis clinically and/or radiologically, with patients compared before (pre-pandemic period: January 1-April 30, 2019) and after (pandemic period: January 1-April 30, 2020) the pandemic. Our investigation included comparisons of pre-operative imaging methods, presence of plastron appendicitis/abscess, conservative/surgical approach, type of anesthesia given, laparoscopic/open surgical approach, bowel resection rates, drain insertion rates, and presence of post-operative complications RESULTS: For the two study groups, 8972 patients from 69 centers were examined, with 4582 patients operated in the pre-pan-demic period and 4234 patients operated in the pandemic period. During the pandemic period, 63.6% of patients underwent open surgery, whereas 34.4% had laparoscopic surgery. Although 60 patients (1.3%) requested non-operative follow-up in the pre-pandemic period, 94 patients (2.2%) requested this in the pandemic period. When conditions of patients were evaluated regardless of their own wishes, 114 patients (2.4%) before and 163 patients (3.8%) during the pandemic received non-operative follow-up. CONCLUSION: Our study did not show the direct correlation between the application of COVID-19-related restrictions and the severity of acute appendicitis. Although non-operative management rates have been increased during the COVID-19 period, the incidences of both complicated and the uncomplicated appendicitis were similar during the COVID-19 crisis period. Given this infor-mation non-operative management can be employed for patients diagnosed with appendicitis.

Morbidity and mortality after the closure of a protective loop ileostomy: analysis of possible predictors.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: A diverting loop ileostomy is often created to protect distal colorectal, coloanal and ileoanal anastomoses. Ileostomy closure is associated with somewhat morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to determine the morbidity and morbidity related factors of ileostomy closure. METHODOLOGY: Prospectively recorded data of 255 patients who underwent diverting loop ileostomy between October 2000 and May 2011 were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: The study consisted of 139 male and 116 female patients with a median age of 54 years (range 17-79) who underwent ileostomy closure. The morbidity rate of ileostomy closure was 18.4% (47 patients) and the mortality rate was 1.2% (3 patients). When patients with morbidity and without morbidity were compared in terms of gender; age, American Society of Anesthesiology Score, primary pathology, surgeon factor; setting of ileostomy creation and time to stoma closure, only American Society of Anesthesiology Score was found as a predictor for morbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Closure of loop ileostomy is a simple procedure with low morbidity and a small but significant risk of mortality. Surgeons must consider the known risks in conjunction with the overall benefit/risk analysis before deciding between a temporary fecal diversion and a discontinuous colonic resection.

Subsite distribution of colorectal carcinoma and implications for screening; a retrospective audit of 1771 cases.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Recent epidemiologic studies mentioned a shift from left to right in colorectal cancer. We searched our hospital database to try to give an insight into the patient characteristics and also optimize the screening programs in our country. METHODOLOGY: A total of 1771 colorectal cancer patients were identified and analyzed. Patients' gender, age, operation dates, tumor localization, resectability and T stage of the lesions, were recorded and comparisons were made. Second step of the study consisted of a questionnaire including 6 questions that were asked to 278 physicians to document current physician attitudes and practices regarding colorectal cancer screening, and to formulate appropriate interventions. RESULTS: Most of our patients were older than 51 in our study and a higher percentage of cases had sigmoid and rectal cancer (67%). The chronological trends in anatomic subsite distribution of colorectal cancer showed that by changing years when left colon cancer percentage was increasing, rectum cancer percentage was decreasing. There was no age-dependent variation in the topographical distribution of colorectal cancer by changing years. Also there was no relation between sex differences and subsite distribution when the whole group was taken into consideration. Specialist physicians had a poor understanding of colorectal cancer screening and lacked the responsibility of the screening programs. CONCLUSIONS: Data presented in this article do not support a progressive left to right shift in the distribution of colorectal carcinoma. Screening with fecal occult blood testing and sigmoidoscopy seems appropriate. Physician education may be an important step in screening before public awareness.