ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Whether re-excision (RE) of a soft tissue sarcoma (STS) of limb or trunk should be systematized as adjuvant care and if it would improve metastatic free survival (MFS) are still debated. The impact of resection margins after unplanned macroscopically complete excision (UE) performed out of a NETSARC reference center or after second resection was further investigated. METHODS: This large nationwide series used data from patients having experienced UE outside of a reference center from 2010 to 2019, collected in a French nationwide exhaustive prospective cohort NETSARC. Patient characteristics and survival distributions in patients reexcised (RE) or not (No-RE) are reported. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard model was conducted to adjust for classical prognosis factors. Subgroup analysis were performed to identify which patients may benefit from RE. RESULTS: Out of 2371 patients with UE for STS performed outside NETSARC reference centers, 1692 patients were not reviewed by multidisciplinary board before treatment decision and had a second operation documented. Among them, 913 patients experienced re-excision, and 779 were not re-excised. Characteristics were significantly different regarding patient age, tumor site, size, depth, grade and histotype in patients re-excised (RE) or not (No-RE). In univariate analysis, final R0 margins are associated with a better MFS, patients with R1 margins documented at first surgery had a better MFS as compared to patients with first R0 resection. The study identified RE as an independent favorable factor for MFS (HR 0.7, 95% CI 0.53-0.93; p = 0.013). All subgroups except older patients (>70 years) and patients with large tumors (>10 cm) had superior MFS with RE. CONCLUSIONS: RE might be considered in patients with STS of limb or trunk, with UE with macroscopic complete resection performed out of a reference center, and also in originally defined R0 margin resections, to improve LRFS and MFS. Systematic RE should not be advocated for patients older than 70 years, or with tumors greater than 10 cm.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: For tumors involving inferior vena cava (IVC), surgery with complete resection remains the first line treatment. Management of IVC after resection, either ligation without reconstruction or primary reconstruction, is debated. Our study aimed to evaluate type of venous reconstruction, anticoagulation management and morbidity. METHODS: A French single center database of patients who underwent partial or total circumferencial resection of the IVC for malignant disease was analyzed. Inclusion criteria were any oncologic procedure for a retroperitoneal neoplasm requiring concomitant resection of the IVC with or without venous reconstruction with prosthesis. Exclusion criteria were surgery before year 2000. Data were descriptive and reverse Kaplan Meier was used for follow-up calculation. The endpoints were the rate of prosthetic reconstruction, the use of anticoagulation and the post-operative outcomes. RESULTS: Fifty - one patients were included with a median duration of follow-up of 54.8 months. The majority of patients were men (56.9%). Median age of the population was 44.1 years. Most of the patients underwent surgery for primary testicular cancer and for sarcoma. Complete IVC resections were performed in 46 (90,2%) patients, 32 having a concomitant prosthetic replacement. Eight patients underwent aortic resection in the same operative time. Postoperative morbidity was 33.3%. Post-operative anticoagulation was done in 24 patients. At 1 month, four patients developed thrombosis in the prosthesis. CONCLUSIONS: IVC resections are feasible and safe. Venous reconstruction and postoperative management were planned according to the preoperative imaging and intraoperative findings. We propose a decision-tree for peri-operative management and anticoagulation.