The negative results in terms of morbidity, mortality and survival among emergency treated patients affected by colorectal cancer are well known. The specific contribution of emergency surgery to adverse outcome is not clear because of the presence in all series of other possible determinants of a poor prognosis. We used a case-control study design to compare a group of 50 patients operated on for cancer of the rectum and left colon presented as emergencies in our department during the last 14 years, and an equal number of patients who underwent elective procedures during the same period. All records of these patients were reviewed and matched for age, stage, tumor location, and medical comorbidities (coronaropathy, diabetes mellitus, cerebral vascular deficiency, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease). Outcome measures included length of hospital stay, morbidity, mortality, and actuarial 5-year survival. Univariate and multivariate analysis of factors potentially influencing survival was performed on the entire population of 100 patients. Age, tumor location, stage of disease, and medical comorbidities were well matched by intent of the study design. Overall surgical morbidity (44% versus 12% P = 0.0004), length of hospital stay (16, 64 versus 10, 97 days P = 0.0026) and postoperative mortality (4% versus 0% P = 0.4949) resulted higher in the emergency group. Actuarial overall 5-year survival was not different between the two groups. The only variables independently predictive of survival in multivariate analysis were age and rectal location of the tumor. Postoperative surgical mortality and long-term survival appear not to be influenced by emergency presentation of colorectal cancer; the negative impact of the emergency procedures is confined to the immediate postoperative period and is probably connected to the acute medical pathology often presented by patients in emergency situations. Dealing with this kind of patient's accurate preoperative assessment and solution of acute medical pathologies before surgical treatment are mandatory.

Long- term follow-up allows to individuate 28 percent of all local relapses after the first five years from surgery. Postoperative stage is highly predictive of prognosis.

Long follow-up seems to indicate more favorable results in Milligan-Morgan procedure in terms of resumption of symptoms and risk of recurrence.

No abstract

Well recognized guidelines are available for the use of cranial computed tomography (CCT) in traumatic patients, while no definitely accepted standards exists to for CCT in patients without history of head injury. The aim of this study is to propose an easy clinical score to stratify the need of CCT in emergency department (ED) patients with suspect non-traumatic intracranial pathology. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated patients presenting to the ED for neurological deficit, postural instability, acute headache, altered mental status, seizures, confusion, dizziness, vertigo, syncope, and pre-syncope. We build a score for positive CCT prediction by using a logistic regression model on clinical factors significant at univariate analysis. The score was validated on a population of prospectively observed patients. Results: We reviewed clinical data of 1156 patients; positivity of CCT was 15.2%. Persistent neurological deficit, new onset acute headache, seizures and/or altered state of consciousness, and transient neurological disorders were independent predictors of positive CCT. We observed 508 patients in a validation prospective cohort; CCT was positive in 11.3%. Our score performed well in validation population with a ROC AUC of 0.787 (CI 95% 0.748-0.822). Avoiding CT in score 0 patients would have saved 82 (16.2%) exams. No patients with score 0 had a positive CCT findings; score sensitivity was 100.0 (CI 95% 93.7-100.0). Conclusions: A score for risk stratification of patients with suspect of intra-cranial pathology could reduce CT request in ED, avoiding a significant number of CCT while minimizing the risk of missing positive results.