Purpose: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected many parts of daily life and healthcare, including cancer screening and diagnosis. The purpose of this study was to determine whether there was an upshift in the colorectal cancer stage at diagnosis due to delays related to the COVID-19 outbreak.Methods: From January to June of each year from 2017 to 2020, a total of 3,229 patients who were first diagnosed with colorectal cancer were retrospectively reviewed. Those enrolled from 2017 to 2019 were classified as the ‘pre-COVID’ group, and those enrolled in 2020 were classified as the ‘COVID’ group. The primary outcome was the rate of stage IV disease at the time of diagnosis.Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of stage IV patients between the pre-COVID and COVID groups (P=0.19). The median preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen level in the COVID group was higher than in the pre-COVID group in all stages (all P<0.05). In stage I, II patients who underwent radical surgery, the lymphatic invasion was more presented in COVID patients (P=0.009).Conclusion: We did not find significant stage upshifting in colorectal cancer during the COVID-19 outbreak. However, there were more initially unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer patients with a low conversion rate to resectable status, and more patients had factors related to poor prognosis. These results may become more apparent over time, so it is vital not to neglect cancer screening to not delay the diagnosis during the COVID-19 epidemic.

A variation in MyHC isoform expression was apparent along the lengths of human EOMs. These results provide a basis for understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying the functional diversity of EOMs.

PurposeAdventitial cystic disease (ACD) is a rare condition that causes intermittent claudication and non-atherosclerotic disease without cardiovascular risk factors. The etiology and optimal treatment of ACD remain controversial. The purpose of this study was to analyze surgical treatment results for ACD and to elucidate optimal treatment options.Materials and MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 30 patients with ACD who underwent surgery from 2006 to 2018. Twenty-two patients had arterial ACD, six had venous ACD, and two had combined venous and arterial ACD. We reviewed demographic and clinical characteristics, treatment details, and procedure outcomes.ResultsRecurrence occurred in 6 cases either after cyst excision alone (4/17) or patch angioplasty (2/2). There was no recurrence after vessel excision with interposition grafting (0/7). Therefore, vessel excision was a statistically significant factor in recurrence prevention (P=0.026). Among the six recurrences, joint connections of the cystic lesions were found in four of the six (66.7%).ConclusionAs a curative surgery for ACD, vessel excision with interposition grafting is a better strategy to prevent recurrence than simple cyst excision alone.

Background: This study aimed to compare the short-term postoperative outcomes of single-port robotic (SPR) using da Vinci SP ® system and single port laparoscopic (SPL) right hemicolectomy and determine whether the novel SPR system is safe and feasible.Methods: From January 2019 to December 2020, a total of 141 patients (41 patients for SPR and 100 patients for SPL) who electively underwent right hemicolectomy for colon cancer performed by a single surgeon were included in the study. Results:The time to the first bowel movement was 3 (range, 1-4) days after surgery in the SPR group and 3 (2-9, range) days in the SPL group (p = 0.017). However, there were no differences in pathologic outcomes or postoperative complications.Conclusions: SPR is a safe and feasible surgical technique and has an advantage in the time to first postoperative bowel movement over SPL with no other complications.

BackgroundAlthough T4b is known to have worse oncologic outcomes, it is unclear whether it truly shows a worse prognosis. This study aims to compare the survival differences between T4a and T4b.MethodsPatients who were pathologically diagnosed with T3 and T4 colorectal adenocarcinoma from 2010 to 2014 were included (T3, n = 1822; T4a, n = 424; T4b, n = 67). Overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were compared between T4a and T4b using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test.ResultsIn stage II, T4a had better OS and CSS than T4b (5-year OS, 89.5% vs. 72.6%; 5-year CSS, 94.4% vs. 81.7%, all p &lt; 0.05), however, in stage III, there were no significant differences in survivals between groups (all p &gt; 0.05). In multivariable analysis, T classification was not an independent risk factor for OS (p &gt; 0.05). However, for CSS, when respectively compared to T3, T4b (HR 3.53, p &lt; 0.001) showed a relatively higher hazard ratio than T4a (HR 2.27, p &lt; 0.001).ConclusionsT4a showed more favorable OS and CSS than T4b, especially in stage II. Our findings support the current AJCC guidelines, in which T4b is presented as a more advanced stage than T4a.

IntroductionObstruction in colon cancer is a well-known risk factor for worse oncologic outcomes. However, studies on differences in survival of patients with incomplete obstructive colon cancer (IOCC) by tumor location are insufficient. Thus, the aim of this study was to compare oncologic outcomes between IOCC and non-obstructive colon cancer (NOCC) according to tumor location.MethodsFrom January 2010 to December 2015, a total of 2,004 patients diagnosed with stage II or stage III colon adenocarcinoma who underwent elective colectomy were included (IOCC, n = 405; NOCC, n = 1,599). Incomplete obstruction was defined as a state in which colonoscopy could not pass through the cancer lesion but did not require emergent surgery, stent insertion, or stoma formation because the patient was asymptomatic without problem in bowel preparation. Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank tests were used to compare survival between IOCC and NOCC. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine which factors affected survivals.ResultsStage III IOCC patients showed significantly lower overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Stage II IOCC patients and stage III NOCC patients had similar survival curves. IOCC patients with tumors on the right side showed worse OS than other patients. In multivariable analysis, incomplete obstruction was an independent risk factor for worse OS and RFS in all stages. Tumor located at the right side in stage III was an independent risk factor for RFS (HR: 1.40, p = 0.030).ConclusionsPatients with IOCC showed significantly worse survival outcomes than those with NOCC. Stage II IOCC patients and stage III NOCC patients showed similar survival. Patients with stage III IOCC located at the right side showed significantly worse oncologic outcomes than those located at the left side. These results confirm that prognosis is different depending on the presence of incomplete obstruction and the location of the tumor, even in the same stage.

Although this study shows that TEVAR can achieve high short-term (1-year) success rates for patients with connective tissue disorders, the lack of long-term data is the weakness of this report. The authors agree that open repair is generally recommended for patients with connective tissue disorder because of concerns with vessel fragility and weakness of the arterial wall. Most authorities recommend open repair to prevent these complications, because a weak arterial wall renders endograft placement a less durable option owing to concerns of proximal or distal aortic degeneration. TEVAR should mainly be used as a bridging treatment for patients who are too high risk for open surgery or those with unstable ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysms or dissections. TEVAR might also be considered at hospitals where interventionalists are capable of performing this endovascular procedure, but the facility does not have the capabilities of performing open repair in these challenging patientsd again, as a bridging procedure.

No abstract