The Utility of Diagnostic Laparoscopic Biopsy for Mesenteric and Retroperitoneal Lymph Nodes.

BACKGROUND Ultrasound (US) or computed tomography (CT)-guided biopsy of intra-abdominal lymph nodes is minimally invasive; however, percutaneous procedures are often difficult to perform because of the location and size of the lymph nodes. In many cases, this approach may result in insufficient specimens necessary to evaluate histopathology. In such cases, laparoscopic biopsy is useful to obtain adequate specimens, regardless of the location and size of the lymph nodes. Additionally, laparoscopic biopsy is an approach that can avoid the possible complications associated with a laparotomy. CASE REPORT Between 2013 and 2016, a series of 11 patients underwent laparoscopic biopsy of mesenteric and retroperitoneal lymph nodes. All patients received a definitive histopathological diagnosis via laparoscopic biopsy. The median postoperative hospital stay was four days (range 3-13 days), and all patients were able to resume oral intake on postoperative day 1. No case was converted to laparotomy, and no major perioperative complication occurred, except for wound infection in one patient. CONCLUSIONS Diagnostic laparoscopic biopsy for mesenteric and retroperitoneal lymph nodes is safe and reliable.

Angiosarcoma arising in the non-operated, sclerosing breast after primary irradiation, surviving 6 years post-resection: A case report and review of the Japanese literature.

INTRODUCTION: Angiosarcoma consists only 0.04% of all breast malignancies and has a poor prognosis. This is the first reported case of an angiosarcoma arising in the non-operated breast after primary irradiation for occult breast cancer. The patient underwent mastectomy, surviving disease free for 6 years. PRESENTATION OF CASE: A 73-year-old woman with a past history of irradiation of the non-operated left breast complained of skin thickening and crust formation on the left nipple 8 years post-irradiation. Considering the clinical history and radiological studies, recurrent cancer was suspected and biopsy was performed. However, no proof of malignancy was obtained. As clinical symptoms continued to advance, informed consent was obtained and mastectomy was performed. Histological examination of the surgical specimen revealed angiosarcoma. DISCUSSION: In this case, angiosarcoma occurred after radiation on a non-operated breast. Preoperative diagnosis was not achieved even with two cytology specimen and one biopsy. Each showed only fibrosis and inflammatory changes. The background breast tissue inflammation should have been caused by radiation. Marked fibrosis and the rather small number of sarcoma cells in the breast tumor in this case may be why bioptic diagnosis was difficult. Kaplan-Meier analysis of 60 Japanese breast angiosarcoma patients showed significantly better prognosis in patients with a tumor 2cm or smaller. CONCLUSION: Angiosarcoma may occur in the non-operated breast, post irradiation. The potential difficulties of diagnosing angiosarcoma against background fibrosis should be kept in mind. Initial radical surgery currently represents the only effective treatment for improving survival in these patients.

A comprehensive expression analysis of mucins in appendiceal carcinoma in a multicenter study: MUC3 is a novel prognostic factor.

BACKGROUND: Mucins are implicated in survival in various cancers, but there have been no report addressed on survival in appendiceal carcinoma, an uncommon disease with different clinical and pathological features from those of other colon cancers. We aimed to investigate the clinical implications of expression of mucins in appendiceal carcinoma. METHODS: Expression profiles of MUC1, MUC2, MUC3, MUC4, MUC5AC, MUC6, MUC16 and MUC17 in cancer tissue were examined by immunohistochemistry in 108 cases of surgically resected appendiceal carcinoma. RESULTS: The following relationships of mucins with clinicopathologic factors were identified: MUC1 with positive lymphatic invasion (p = 0.036); MUC2 with histological type (mucinous carcinoma, p<0.001), superficial invasion depth (p = 0.007), negative venous invasion (p = 0.003), and curative resection (p = 0.019); MUC3 with non-curative resection (p = 0.017); MUC5AC with histological type (mucinous carcinoma, p = 0.002), negative lymphatic invasion (p = 0.021), and negative venous invasion (p = 0.022); and MUC16 with positive lymph node metastasis (p = 0.035), positive venous invasion (p<0.05), and non-curative resection (p = 0.035). A poor prognosis was related to positive lymph node metastasis (p = 0.04), positive lymphatic invasion (p = 0.02), positive venous invasion (p<0.001), non-curative resection (p<0.001), and positive expression of MUC3 (p = 0.004). In multivariate analysis, positive venous invasion (HR: 6.93, 95% CI: 1.93-24.96, p = 0.003), non-curative resection (HR: 10.19, 95% CI: 3.05-34.07, p<0.001) and positive MUC3 expression (HR: 3.37, 95% CI: 1.13-10.03, p = 0.03) were identified as significant independent prognostic factors in patients with appendiceal carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: Expression of MUC3 in appendiceal carcinoma is an independent factor for poor prognosis and a useful predictor of outcome in patients with appendiceal carcinoma after surgery.

Efficacy of preoperative dexamethasone in patients with laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized double-blind study.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Dexamethasone has been reported to reduce postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). However, its effect on other surgical outcomes such as pain and fatigue have been unclear. The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate the efficacy of preoperative dexamethasone in ameliorating postoperative symptoms after LC. METHODS: In this prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 80 patients scheduled for LC were analyzed after randomization to intravenous dexamethasone (8 mg) or placebo. All patients underwent standardized procedures for general anesthesia and surgery, and were recommended to remain in hospital for 3 postoperative days. Episodes of PONV, and pain and fatigue scores on a visual analogue scale (VAS) were recorded. Analgesic and antiemetic requirements were also recorded. RESULTS: There were no apparent side effects of the study drug. Seven patients (18%) in the dexamethasone group reported nausea, compared with 16 (40%) in the placebo group (p = 0.026). One patient (3%) in the dexamethasone group and 7 (18%) in the placebo group reported vomiting (p = 0.025). Dexamethasone significantly reduced the postoperative VAS pain score (p = 0.030) and VAS fatigue score (p = 0.023). The mean number of patients requiring diclofenac sodium 50 mg was 0.9 +/- 1.3 in the dexamethasone group and 2.2 +/- 2.5 in the placebo group (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The regimen we employed is safe and without apparent side effects. These results suggest that preoperative dexamethasone (8 mg) significantly reduces the incidence of PONV, pain, and fatigue after LC.