Background: The aim of this study was to assess the safety and surgical results of femtosecond laser-assisted phacovitrectomy. Methods: A retrospective analysis of the medical records of patients over 50 years of age with vitreoretinal pathology, who had undergone pars plana vitrectomy using 23-gauge instruments and femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery and implantation of an intraocular lens, was performed at the Instituto de Microcirugía Ocular between June 2012 and September 2013. The diameter of the anterior capsulorhexis was set at 4.8 mm in cases where a gas tamponade was used and at 5 mm in all other cases. During the pars plana vitrectomy, posterior capsulotomy was performed on all eyes. An assessment was carried out of preoperative characteristics, surgical indications, postoperative results and complications. Only patients with a minimum of 3 months of follow-up were included. Results: A total of 21 eyes in 21 patients (71.4% women) were treated. Mean age (±SD) was 65.8 ± 6.4 years (range 53-76). The most common indication for surgery was epiretinal membrane (61.9%), followed by vitreous haemorrhage (23.8%) and macular hole (14.3%). The mean preoperative best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was 0.81 ± 1.01 logMAR and the mean postoperative BCVA was 0.12 ± 0.19 logMAR (p = 0.003). 85.7% of patients improved their visual acuity. The remaining patients maintained their visual acuity. The only intraoperative complication related to femtosecond laser was 1 case of suction loss (4.8%). A patient with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment discovered during surgery required an additional circular scleral procedure and developed synechiaes in the early postoperative period (<1 month). There were no cases of subluxation of the intraocular lens. Mean follow-up was 6 months (range 3-14). Conclusions: The application of femtosecond laser in phacovitrectomy is a safe and effective technique that presents advantages compared to conventional techniques in cases of macular pathology and/or vitreous haemorrhage.
Introduction: Preoperative treatment and adequate surgery increase local control in rectal cancer. However, modalities and indications for neoadjuvant treatment may be controversial. Aim of this study was to assess the trends of preoperative treatment and outcomes in patients with rectal cancer included in the Rectal Cancer Registry of the Spanish Associations of Surgeons. Method: This is a STROBE-compliant retrospective analysis of a prospective database. All patients operated on with curative intention included in the Rectal Cancer Registry were included. Analyses were performed to compare the use of neoadjuvant/adjuvant treatment in three timeframes: I)2006e2009; II) 2010e2013; III)2014e2017. Survival analyses were run for 3-year survival in timeframes I-II. Results: Out of 14,391 patients,8871 (61.6%) received neoadjuvant treatment. Long-course chemo/ radiotherapy was the most used approach (79.9%), followed by short-course radiotherapy ± chemotherapy (7.6%). The use of neoadjuvant treatment for cancer of the upper third (15-11 cm) increased over time (31.5%vs 34.5%vs 38.6%,p ¼ 0.0018). The complete regression rate slightly increased over time (15.6% vs 16% vs 18.5%; p ¼ 0.0093); the proportion of patients with involved circumferential resection margins (CRM) went down from 8.2% to 7.3%and 5.5% (p ¼ 0.0004). Neoadjuvant treatment significantly decreased positive CRM in lower third tumors (OR 0.71, 0.59e0.87, Cochrane-Mantel-Haenszel P ¼ 0.0008). Most ypN0 patients also received adjuvant therapy. In MR-defined stage III patients, preoperative treatment was associated with significantly longer local-recurrence-free survival (p < 0.0001), and cancer-specific survival (p < 0.0001). The survival benefit was smaller in upper third cancers.
Conclusion:There was an increasing trend and a potential overuse of neoadjuvant treatment in cancer of the upper rectum. Most ypN0 patients received postoperative treatment. Involvement of CRM in lower third tumors was reduced after neoadjuvant treatment. Stage III and MRcN þ benefited the most.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.