For patients with unresectable ICC treated with HAT, HAI offered the best outcomes in terms of tumor response and survival but may be limited by toxicity.

BackgroundWe hypothesized that diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) was feasible for the evaluation of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) undergoing cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS + HIPEC).MethodsA retrospective review of PC patients treated from January 2010 to April 2013 was conducted. Data on tumor characteristics, treatment details and survival outcomes were extracted and analyzed.ResultsOf the 101 PC patients (mean age 52.9 ± 14.1 years), 73 diagnostic laparoscopies DL (61 concurrent with CRS + HIPEC) were performed in 70 patients whereas 31 patients underwent direct exploratory laparotomy (EL). Complete laparoscopic assessment was possible in 63 cases (86.3%), resulting in 18 exclusions (27.7%) while 10 cases were converted to open due to inadequate laparoscopic visualization. Subsequently, CRS + HIPEC was performed in 85.4% (of 55 selected for HIPEC, DL) versus 74.2% (EL, P value = 0.20). Among those excluded from HIPEC at the initial operation, delayed HIPEC after conversion chemotherapy was achieved in 6 (of 11 with extensive disease, DL). The incidence of grade 3 to 5 complications was 0% DL versus 10% EL (P value = 0.2). There were no port site recurrences at mean follow up of 9.1 ± 8 months.ConclusionsLaparoscopy is a feasible technique for selecting patients with PC for CRS + HIPEC, and can help select patients for conversion chemotherapy in the setting of high peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI) score.

Diagnostic laparoscopy can be safely incorporated in the management of patients with peritoneal metastases, and can be especially beneficial in excluding patients from attempted incomplete cytoreduction.

Background: The 2020 Major League Baseball (MLB) season was drastically altered because of the COVID-19 pandemic. The changes included an extended layoff between March and July as well as a shortened preseason. Purpose/Hypothesis: To determine the incidence and epidemiology of MLB injuries in the abbreviated 2020 season compared with prior seasons. We hypothesized that there was an increase in the overall injury rate in the 2020 season compared with the 2018-2019 seasons and that it equally affected all body regions. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Methods: The MLB transactions database was queried to find players who had been placed on the injury list between 2018 and 2020. Injuries were categorized into upper extremity, lower extremity, spine/core, and other injuries. Incidence per 1000 athlete-exposures was calculated for the prior 2 seasons (2018-2019) and for the 2020 season separately. Incidence for each category was also calculated separately for pitchers and fielders. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and confidence intervals were used to compare injury rates in 2018-2019 versus 2020. The z test for proportions was used to determine significant differences between injury incidences. Results: In 2020, the overall incidence rate per 1000 athlete-exposures was almost twice the rate compared with the 2 seasons before COVID-19 (8.66 vs 5.13; IRR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.53-1.87]; P < .001). Injury incidence increased similarly in 2020 for both pitchers (IRR, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.47-1.91]; P < .001) and fielders (IRR, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.45-1.96]; P < .001). Increases in injury incidence were seen in the upper extremity, spine/core, and other injury categories; however, the incidence of the lower extremity did not change significantly. Conclusion: There was a significant increase in injury incidence for both pitchers and fielders in 2020. Injury rates increased in anatomic zones of the upper extremity and spine/core but were not significantly changed in the lower extremity. The overall increase in injury rate suggests that irregular or insufficient sport-specific preparation prior to the start of the season placed athletes at a greater risk of injury when play resumed.

BackgroundPatients with unresectable Colorectal Liver Metastases (CRLM) are increasingly being managed using Hepatic Artery Based Therapies (HAT), including Hepatic Arterial Infusion (HAI), Radioembolization (RE), and Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization (TACE). Limited data is available on the comparative effectiveness of these options. We hypothesized that outcomes in terms of survival and toxicity were equivalent across the three strategies.MethodsA meta-analysis was performed using a prospectively registered search strategy at PROSPERO (CRD42013003861) that utilized studies from PubMed (2003–2013). Primary outcome was median overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were treatment toxicity, tumor response, and conversion of the tumor to resectable. Additional covariates included prior or concurrent systemic therapy.ResultsOf 491 studies screened, 90 were selected for analyses—52 (n = 3,000 patients) HAI, 24 (n = 1,268) RE, 14 (n = 1,038) TACE. The median OS (95% CI) for patients receiving HAT in the first-line were RE 29.4 vs. HAI 21.4 vs. TACE 15.2 months (p = 0.97, 0.69 respectively). For patients failing at least one line of prior systemic therapy, the survival outcomes were TACE 21.3 (20.6–22.4) months vs. HAI 13.2 (12.2–14.2) months vs. RE 10.7 (9.5–12.0). Grade 3–4 toxicity for HAT alone was 40% in the HAI group, 19% in the RE group, and 18% in the TACE groups, which was increased with the addition of systemic chemotherapy. Level 1 evidence was available in 5 studies for HAI, 2 studies for RE and 1 for TACE.ConclusionHAI, RE, and TACE are equally effective in patients with unresectable CRLM with marginal differences in survival.