Cosmetic outcome of skin adhesives versus transcutaneous sutures in laparoscopic port-site wounds: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In an elective laparoscopic surgery, the cosmetic outcome becomes increasingly important. We conducted a study to evaluate the cosmetic outcome 3 months after a laparoscopic procedure and compared skin adhesive (SA) versus transcutaneous suture (TS). METHODS: A randomized, controlled, prospective study was conducted at a single study centre in Hamburg, Germany. Seventy-seven patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery with two lower abdominal port sites met the study requirements. It was decided randomly which port site would be closed with SA. The opposite site was closed with TS. Wounds were assessed after 7-12 days and after 3 months. Cosmetic outcome was measured by a visual analogue scale (VAS) completed by the patient, by the Hollander wound evaluation scale (HWES) and by the judgement of blinded investigators. RESULTS: Seventy-seven subjects were randomized. Complete data from the 3-month follow-up visit were available from 56 patients (72.7 %). The VAS scale ranged from 0 to 100 mm with "0" representing the best possible cosmetic outcome. Median satisfaction was 2 mm in the TS group and 3 mm in the SA group. The mean was high in both groups 4.6 (s = 13.1) versus 3.8 mm (s = 4.6). The outcome was neither clinically nor statistically significant. Cosmetic outcome was assessed by an investigator, and the HWES showed no difference. In regard to complications, no difference was found between SA and TS, either. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion this study demonstrated that closure of laparoscopic port-site wounds leads to equivalent outcomes whether SAs or TSs are used. Complications are rare in both methods. Thus, SAs seem to be a valid alternative to sutures in laparoscopic surgery. Registration site: www.clinicaltrials.gov . REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02179723.

Topotecan Weekly Versus Conventional 5-Day Schedule in Patients With Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer: a randomized multicenter phase II trial of the North-Eastern German Society of Gynecological Oncology Ovarian Cancer Study Group.

PURPOSE: Weekly administration of topotecan (Tw) is less toxic and widely considered a better treatment option than conventional 5-day therapy (Tc) in women with platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer. We conducted a randomized phase II trial (TOWER [Topotecan Weekly Versus Conventional 5-Day Schedule in Patients With Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer]) to better define the ratio between benefits and risks with either treatment approach. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to two independent two-stage protocols of Tw (4 mg/m(2)/wk administered on days 1, 8, and 15) or Tc (1.25 mg/m(2)/d on days 1 to 5). We evaluated risk ratios (RRs) for the primary end point of clinical benefit (complete response, partial response, and stable disease), the duration of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), associated hazard ratios (HRs), and RRs of toxicity with 95% CIs. RESULTS: In total, 194 patients were randomly assigned at 54 centers to Tw (n = 97) or Tc (n = 97). Clinical benefit was observed in 36 of 76 (47%; 95% CI, 36% to 59%) Tw and 46 of 80 (58%; 95% CI, 46% to 68%) Tc patients (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.64; P = .205). Patients in the Tw group had a slightly shorter PFS (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.76) but similar OS (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.45) compared with Tc. Tw was associated with significantly lower risks of anemia (RR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.79), neutropenia (RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.65), and thrombocytopenia (RR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.57). CONCLUSION: With regard to effectiveness in terms of response and PFS, Tc remains the standard of care in patients with platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer. However, comparable OS rates and a favorable toxicity profile make Tw another viable treatment option in this setting.