No abstract

Background Undoubtedly, robotic systems have largely penetrated the surgical field. For any new operative approach to become an accepted alternative to conventional methods, it must be proved safe and result in comparable outcomes. The purpose of this study is to compare the short-term operative as well as oncologic outcomes of robotic-assisted and laparoscopic rectal cancer resections. MethodsThis is a prospective randomized clinical trial conducted on patients with rectal cancer undergoing either robotic-assisted or laparoscopic surgery from April 2015 till February 2017. Patients' demographics, operative parameters, and short-term clinical and oncological outcomes were analyzed. Results Fifty-seven patients underwent permuted block randomization. Of these patients, 28 were assigned to undergo robotic-assisted rectal surgery and 29 to laparoscopic rectal surgery. After exclusion of 12 patients following randomization, 45 patients were included in the analysis. No significant differences exist between both groups in terms of age, gender, BMI, ASA score, clinical stage, and rate of receiving upfront chemoradiation. Estimated blood loss was evidently lower in the robotic than in the laparoscopic group (median: 200 versus 325 ml, p= 0.050). A significantly more distal margin is achieved in the robotic than in the laparoscopic group (median: 2.8 versus 1.8, p< 0.001). Although the circumferential radial margin (CRM) was complete in 18 patients (85.7%) in the robotic group in contrast to 15 patients (62.5%) in the laparoscopic group, it did not differ statistically (p=0.079). The overall postoperative complication rates were similar between the two groups. Conclusion To our knowledge, this is the first prospective randomized trial of robotic rectal surgery in the Middle East and Northern Africa region. Our early experience indicates that robotic rectal surgery is a feasible and safe procedure. It is not inferior to standard laparoscopy in terms of oncologic radicality and surgical complications. Organization number is IORG0003381. IRB number is IRB00004025.

No abstract

Elevated serum RBP-4 and NGAL are associated with pancreatic cancer. They were positively interrelated; highlighting the possible interplay between them in pancreatic cancer.

Retinol binding protein 4, NGAL, IGF-I, and IGFBP-3 are associated with PC in type 2 diabetic patients. They could be useful in distinguishing PC from non-PC cases when used in combination or with cancer antigen.

Both HCV and hepatitis B virus infection increase the risk of HCC in Egyptian patients, whereas isolated Schistosoma infection does not. Because of the very high prevalence rate of HCV in the general Egyptian population, it accounts for most HCC cases in Egypt.

No abstract

Intersphincteric resection with TME does not affect the local recurrence or overall survival rate in early rectal cancer T1-2 & 3, with preservation of bowel continuity and better life quality.