Clinical and prognostic differences between surgically resected right-sided and left-sided colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: A growing body of evidence suggests that right-sided colorectal cancer (RCRC) differs from left-sided colorectal cancer (LCRC) in certain clinicopathological features. Therefore, we investigated the difference between RCRC and LCRC in a series of 899 patients. METHODS: We reviewed data retrospectively, from 899 patients who underwent R0-resection for stage II and III CRC and compared the clinicopathological factors between patients with RCRC and LCRC. RESULTS: The patients with RCRC tended to be older, more likely female, with a larger tumor, higher pathological T stage, and a greater proportion of their tumors were poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma, mucinous adenocarcinoma, or signet ring cell carcinoma than the patients with LCRC,. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) of the patients with RCRC tended to be higher than that of the patients with LCRC and was significantly better among patients with stage II cancer. The overall survival (OS) was similar for patients with RCRC and LCRC, irrespective of cancer stage. CONCLUSION: Compared with the patients with LCRC, those with RCRC had several oncologically unfavorable factors, with better RFS in stage II and similar OS in stages II and III. These results suggest that the biological aggressiveness of RCRC is lower than that of LCRC in stage II; however, it can increase after relapse.

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery for synchronous primary rectal and prostate cancer: Initial case series.

Few studies have reported the simultaneous resection of synchronous rectal and prostate cancers. Here, we report five patients undergoing simultaneous robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) for synchronous rectal and prostate cancer. Rectal cancer operative procedures were high anterior (n =1), intersphincteric (n =2), or abdominoperineal (n =2) resection, followed by radical prostatectomy with vesico-urethral anastomosis. There were no conversions to open surgery, with R0 resection achieved for all rectal cancer cases. The median operative time was 629 (range, 431-764) minutes, and the median estimated blood loss was 100 (range, 20-345) mL. There was one case of colorectal anastomotic leakage requiring covering ileostomy, and two cases of vesico-urethral anastomotic leakage requiring Foley catheter reinsertion. Ileostomies were finally closed in all patients. Pad-free or safety-pad usage for post-surgical urinary incontinence at 6 and 12 months was 3/5 and 5/5, respectively. Simultaneous RALS for synchronous rectal and prostate cancer may offer a safe and feasible approach in selected patients.

Diagnosis of appendiceal diverticulitis by multidetector computed tomography.

PURPOSE: Because appendiceal diverticulitis (AD) has a high risk of perforation, precise diagnosis is important for patients with suspected acute appendicitis (AA). In this study, we aimed to reveal the characteristics of computed tomography (CT) images of AD. METHODS: CT images were comparatively analyzed in patients who underwent appendectomy and had histopathologically proved AD (n = 23) or AA (n = 365) to reveal specific findings of CT image for AD and determine sensitivity and specificity of CT for AD. RESULTS: Univariate analysis showed that maximal diameter of the appendix in AD was significantly smaller than that in AA. Multivariate analysis showed that saccular structure of the appendix wall, cecum or ascending colon diverticulum and peri-appendiceal or -cecal fluid collection were significant independent indicators of AD. Based on that saccular structure of the appendix wall which was the most important specific finding, the sensitivity and specificity of CT for AD were 48% and 99%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The saccular structure of the appendix wall, cecum or ascending colon diverticulum and peri-appendiceal or -cecal fluid collection in CT suggest AD in patients with suspected AA. The sensitivity and specificity of CT for diagnosing AD were 48% and 99%, respectively.