RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We retrospectively evaluated the value of PET/CT in predicting survival and histopathological tumour-response in patients with distal oesophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma following neoadjuvant treatment. METHODS: Twenty-one patients with resectable distal oesophageal adenocarcinoma and 14 with gastric adenocarcinoma between January 2002 and December 2011, who had undergone serial PET before and after neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery, were enrolled. Maximum standard uptake value (SUVmax) and metabolic tumour volume were measured and correlated with tumour regression grade and survival. RESULTS: Histopathological tumour response (PR) is a stronger predictor of overall and disease-free survival compared to metabolic response. ∆%SUVmax ≥70% was the only PET metric that predicted PR (82.4% sensitivity, 61.5% specificity, p = 0.047). Histopathological non-responders had a higher risk of death (HR 8.461, p = 0.001) and recurrence (HR 6.385, p = 0.002) and similarly in metabolic non-responders for death (HR 2.956, p = 0.063) and recurrence (HR 3.614, p = 0.028). Ordinalised ∆%SUVmax showed a predictive trend for OS and DFS, but failed to achieve statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: PR was a stronger predictor of survival than metabolic response. ∆%SUVmax ≥70% was the best biomarker on PET that predicted PR and survival in oesophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma. Ordinalisation of ∆%SUVmax was not helpful in predicting primary outcomes.
Assuntos
Adenocarcinoma/diagnóstico por imagem , Adenocarcinoma/cirurgia , Neoplasias Esofágicas/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirurgia , Tomografia por Emissão de Pósitrons combinada à Tomografia Computadorizada , Neoplasias Gástricas/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias Gástricas/cirurgia , Adenocarcinoma/metabolismo , Adenocarcinoma/patologia , Adulto , Idoso , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Neoplasias Esofágicas/metabolismo , Neoplasias Esofágicas/patologia , Esôfago/diagnóstico por imagem , Esôfago/metabolismo , Esôfago/patologia , Esôfago/cirurgia , Feminino , Fluordesoxiglucose F18 , Seguimentos , Mucosa Gástrica/metabolismo , Humanos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Terapia Neoadjuvante , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/diagnóstico por imagem , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/patologia , Prognóstico , Compostos Radiofarmacêuticos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estômago/diagnóstico por imagem , Estômago/patologia , Estômago/cirurgia , Neoplasias Gástricas/metabolismo , Neoplasias Gástricas/patologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Few objective data exist describing current anesthesia practice for pediatric renal transplantation. We describe here, the experience from an Australian tertiary pediatric center that has continued an active pediatric renal transplantation program after relocation in 1995. Areas of interest include preoperative status, fluid management, hemodynamic stability, perioperative complications, and the use of epidural analgesia. In particular, the influence of perioperative epidural analgesia on hemodynamic stability is addressed. METHODS: A retrospective review of anesthesia records of all patients undergoing pediatric renal transplantation performed at the Children's Hospital at Westmead (CHW), from November 1995 to October 2002 was carried out. RESULTS: Fifty-three pediatric renal transplants were performed in 50 patients. Average age and weight were 10.2 years (range: 1-18 years) and 31.4 kg (range: 9-66 kg), respectively. A total of 14 recipients were less than or equal to 6 years of age. Twenty-four children were recipients of cadaveric transplants, 29 children received kidneys from living related donors. Few children presented with severe anemia (two patients) gross electrolyte abnormalities (three patients) or uncontrolled hypertension. Intraoperatively, all children had central venous pressure monitoring and only four had invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring. Average intraoperative fluid administration was 88 ml x kg(-1) (range: 30-190). Twenty-three children received blood transfusions intraoperatively. Postoperative analgesia was provided using an epidural infusion in 39 patients and an opioid infusion/patient controlled analgesia in the remainder. There was a tendency to greater hemodynamic stability in the group, which received intra-operative epidural analgesia. Half the patients who had epidural analgesia required parenteral opioid supplementation. Five patients had postoperative pulmonary edema. Minor postoperative adverse events included epidural associated motor block (three cases) and opioid related oversedation (one patient). No perioperative mortality or major morbidity was recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Anesthesia for renal transplantation in pediatric patients at CHW is safe and effective using a selected range of drugs and techniques. Pretransplant medical optimization, careful preoperative assessment, adequate monitoring and precise fluid management together with appropriate postoperative analgesia typify the perioperative care of CHW renal transplant recipients.