Robotic lateral pelvic lymph node dissection after chemoradiation for rectal cancer: a Western perspective.

AIM: There are limited outcome data for lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT), particularly in the West. Our aim was to evaluate the short-term perioperative and oncological outcomes of robotic LPLND at a single cancer centre. METHOD: A retrospective analysis of a prospective database of consecutive patients undergoing robotic LPLND for rectal cancer between November 2012 and February 2020 was performed. The main outcomes were short-term perioperative and oncological outcomes. Major morbidity was defined as Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or above. RESULTS: Forty patients underwent robotic LPLND during the study period. The mean age was 54 years (SD ± 15 years) and 13 (31.0%) were female. The median body mass index was 28.6 kg/m2 (IQR 25.5-32.6 kg/m2 ). Neoadjuvant CRT was performed in all patients. Resection of the primary rectal cancer and concurrent LPLND occurred in 36 (90.0%) patients, whilst the remaining 4 (10.0%) patients had subsequent LPLND after prior rectal resection. The median operating time was 420 min (IQR 313-540 min), estimated blood loss was 150 ml (IQR 55-200 ml) and length of hospital stay was 4 days (IQR 3-6 days). The major morbidity rate was 10.0% (n = 4). The median lymph node harvest from the LPLND was 6 (IQR 3-9) and 13 (32.5%) patients had one or more positive LPLNs. The median follow-up was 16 months (IQR 5-33 months), with 1 (2.5%) local central recurrence and 7 (17.5%) patients developing distant disease, resulting in 3 (7.5%) deaths. CONCLUSION: Robotic LPLND for rectal cancer can be performed in Western patients to completely resect extra-mesorectal LPLNs and is associated with acceptable perioperative morbidity.

Robotic rectal cancer surgery: comparative study of the impact of obesity on early outcomes.

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic total mesorectal excision (TME) in obese versus non-obese patients. A total of 533 patients, of whom 161 were obese (30·2 per cent) underwent robotic proctectomy during the study interval. Patient obesity was not associated with adverse short-term clinical outcomes after robotic rectal cancer surgery. Indicated in the obese perhaps?

Select men benefit from androgen deprivation therapy delivered with salvage radiation therapy after prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Which men benefit most from adding androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to salvage radiation therapy (SRT) after prostatectomy has not clearly been defined; therefore, we evaluated the impact of ADT to SRT on failure-free survival (FFS) in men with a rising or persistent PSA after prostatectomy. METHODS: We identified 332 men who received SRT after prostatectomy from 1987 to 2010. Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) identified favorable, intermediate and unfavorable groups based on the risk of failure after SRT alone. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests compared FFS with and without ADT. RESULTS: Forty-three percent received SRT alone and 57% received SRT with ADT (median 6.6 months (interquartile range (IQR) 5.8-18.1) ADT). Median SRT dose was 70 Gy (IQR 70-70), and median follow-up after SRT was 6.7 years (IQR 4.5-10.8). On Cox's proportional hazard regression, ADT improved FFS (adjusted hazard ratio 0.60, 95% confidence interval: 0.42-0.86; P=0.006). RPA classified unfavorable disease as negative surgical margins (SMs) and preradiation PSA of ⩾0.5 ng ml-1. Favorable disease had neither adverse factor, and intermediate disease had one adverse factor. The addition of ADT to SRT improved 5-year FFS for men with unfavorable disease (70.3% vs 23.4%; P<0.001) and intermediate disease (69.8% vs 48.0%; P=0.003), but not for men with favorable disease (81.2% vs 78.0%; P=0.971). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of ADT to SRT appears to improve FFS for men with a preradiation PSA of ⩾0.5 ng ml-1 or with negative SM at prostatectomy. Men with involved surgical margins and PSA <0.5 ng ml-1 appear to be at a lower risk of failure after SRT alone and may not derive as much benefit from the administration of ADT with SRT. These results are hypothesis-generating only, and further prospective data are required to see if ADT can safely be omitted in this select group of men.