IntroductionCentralization of gastric cancer surgery is thought to improve outcome and has been imposed in the Netherlands since 2012. This study analyzes the effect of centralization in terms of treatment outcome and survival in the Eastern part of the Netherlands.MethodsAll gastric cancer patients without distant metastases who underwent a gastrectomy in six hospitals in the Eastern part of the Netherlands between 2008 and 2011 (pre-centralization) and 2013–2016 (post-centralization) were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patient and tumor characteristics and treatment outcomes (duration of surgery, blood loss, resection margin, lymphadenectomy, chemotherapy, postoperative complications and hospital stay, and overall and disease-free survival) were analyzed and compared between pre- and post-centralization.ResultsOne hundred forty-four patients were included pre-centralization and 106 patients post-centralization. Patient and tumor characteristics were almost similar in the two periods. After centralization, more patients were treated with perioperative chemotherapy (25 vs. 42% p < 0.01). The proportion of patients treated with an adequate lymphadenectomy (21 vs. 93% p < 0.01) and laparoscopic surgery (6 vs. 40% p < 0.01) increased significantly (p < 0.01). The amount of cardiac complications (16 vs. 7.5% p < 0.05) decreased; however, complications needing a re-intervention were comparable (42 vs. 40% p = 0.79). Median hospital stay decreased from 10 to 8 days (p < 0.01). A 30-day mortality did not differ significantly (4.2 vs. 1.9%). A 1-year overall (78 vs. 80% p = 0.17) and disease-free survival (73 vs. 74% p = 0.66) remained stable.DiscussionCentralizing gastric cancer treatment in the Eastern part of the Netherlands resulted in improved lymph node harvesting and a successful introduction of laparoscopic gastrectomies. Centralization has not translated into improved mortality, and other variables may also have led to these improved outcomes. Further research using a nationwide population-based study will be needed to confirm these data.
BackgroundIn most western European countries perioperative chemotherapy is a part of standard curative treatment for gastric cancer. Nevertheless, recurrence rates remain high after multimodality treatment. This study examines patterns of recurrence in patients receiving perioperative chemotherapy with surgery for gastric cancer in a real-world setting.MethodsAll patients diagnosed with gastric adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2015 who underwent at least preoperative chemotherapy and a gastrectomy with curative intent (cT1N+/cT2-4a,X; any cN; cM0) in 18 Dutch hospitals were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Additional data on chemotherapy and recurrence were collected from medical records. Rates, patterns, and timing of recurrence were examined. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses were used to determine prognostic factors for recurrence.Results408 patients were identified. After a median follow-up of 27.8 months, 36.8% of the gastric cancer patients had a recurrence of which the majority (88.8%) had distant metastasis. The 1-year recurrence-free survival was 71.8%. The risk of recurrence was higher in patients with an ypN+ stage (HR 4.92, 95% CI 3.35–7.24), partial or no tumor regression (HR 2.63, 95% CI 1.22–5.64), 3 instead of ≥ 6 chemotherapy cycles (HR 3.04, 95% CI 1.99–4.63), R1 resection (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.02–2.26), and < 15 resected lymph nodes (HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.14–2.37).ConclusionA considerable amount of gastric cancer patients who were treated with curative intent developed a recurrence despite surgery and perioperative treatment. The majority developed distant metastases, therefore, multimodality treatment approaches should be focused on the prevention of distant rather than locoregional recurrences to improve survival.
Background Previous studies have indicated that the appendix may be a priming site of ulcerative colitis (UC). Appendectomy is inversely associated with the development of UC, and is suggested to have a beneficial effect on the disease course in patients with refractory disease. Objective The aim of the current study was to assess histological features of appendices from patients with UC and their clinical relevance. Methods Patients with UC in remission and active UC (therapy refractory) that underwent appendectomy between 2012 and 2019 were included. Histological features of UC appendices were compared to those of patients with acute appendicitis and colon carcinoma. The Robarts Histopathology Index (RHI) was used to assess appendiceal inflammation. In patients with active UC, histological and clinical characteristics were compared between patients with and without endoscopic response following appendectomy. Results In total, 140 appendix specimens were assessed (n = 35 UC remission, n = 35 active UC, n = 35 acute appendicitis, n = 35 colon carcinoma). Histological features of appendices from UC patients looked like UC rather than acute appendicitis. The presence of active appendiceal inflammation was comparable between patients in remission versus active disease (53.7% vs. 46.3%, p = 0.45) and limited versus extensive disease (58.5% vs. 41.5%, p = 0.50). Endoscopic response (Mayo 0–1) following appendectomy, assessed in 28 therapy refractory patients, was more frequently seen in patients with higher RHI scores (RHI > 6: 81.8% vs. RHI ≤ 6: 9.1%, p = 0.03) and limited disease (proctitis/left sided 63.6% vs. pancolitis 36.4%, p = 0.02). Conclusion The presence of active appendiceal inflammation is common in UC and does not correlate with colonic disease activity. More than 50% of UC patients in remission showed active histological disease in the appendix. Favorable response to appendectomy for refractory UC was seen in cases with ulcerative appendicitis. These findings might support the role of the appendix as a pivotal organ in UC.
Objective: This systematic review aims to assess the incidence of pouch failure and the correlation between ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA)-related complications and pouch failure. Background: Previous studies demonstrated wide variation in postoperative complication rates following IPAA. Methods: A systematic review was performed by searching the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for studies reporting on pouch failure published from January 1, 2010, to May 6, 2020. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model, and the relationship between pouch-related complications and pouch failure was assessed using Spearman’s correlations. Results: Thirty studies comprising 22,978 patients were included. Included studies contained heterogenic patient populations, different procedural stages, varying definitions for IPAA-related complications, and different follow-up periods. The pooled pouch failure rate was 7.7% (95% confidence intervals: 5.56–10.59) and 10.3% (95% confidence intervals: 7.24–14.30) for studies with a median follow-up of ≥5 and ≥10 years, respectively. Observed IPAA-related complications were anastomotic leakage (1–17%), pelvic sepsis (2–18%), fistula (1–30%), stricture (1–34%), pouchitis (11–61%), and Crohn’s disease of the pouch (0–18%). Pelvic sepsis (r = 0.51, P < 0.05) and fistula (r = 0.63, P < 0.01) were correlated with pouch failure. A sensitivity analysis including studies with a median follow-up of ≥5 years indicated that only fistula was significantly correlated with pouch failure (r = 0.77, P < 0.01). Conclusions: The single long-term determinant of pouch failure was pouch fistula, which is a manifestation of a chronic leak. Therefore, all effort should be taken to prevent an acute leak from becoming a chronic leak by early diagnosis and proactive management of the leak. Mini abstract: This systematic review aims to assess the incidence of pouch failure and the correlation between IPAA-related complications and pouch failure. Long-term pouch failure was correlated with fistula, suggesting that early septic complications may result in fistula formation during long-term follow-up, leading to an increased risk of pouch failure.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.