Background: Appendiceal neuroendocrine neoplasms (ANEN) are uncommon entities, which run mostly an indolent course. Appendicectomy alone is usually curative, except for in a selected group of patients that are deemed to be at risk of loco-regional metastases, in whom a completion right hemicolectomy (RHC) is recommended. The current “Guidelines” criteria for the latter have been controversial, and may result in overtreatment, which is concerning for a young patient population. Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the prognostic value of the current criteria in identifying more accurately those at-risk patients. Methods: This was a retrospective study of the 263 cases of ANEN referred for advice or management to a tertiary referral unit over a 10-year period. Seventy-two patients underwent RHC, based on criteria, suggested by International Guidelines. Each one of those was assessed to identify whether it correlated with lymph node invasion (LNI) at the RHC surgical specimen. Results: Tumour grade (p < 0.001), vascular (p = 0.044) and lymph vessel invasion (p < 0.001) were all found to be statistically significant independent risk factors for LNI identified following RHC, whilst tumour size (p = 0.375) and mesoappendiceal invasion (MAI) (p = 0.317) were not statistically significant. However, deep MAI and tumour size >2 cm showed a correlation with each other on LNI positive subgroup analysis. Location in appendiceal base made LNI more likely but again was not significant (p = 0.133). Conclusions: Higher tumour grade and lymphovascular invasion should be considered as the most important risk prognosticators. Surprisingly, tumour size was not found to be significant in our cohort. Further international multicentre studies with large numbers of patients are needed to fully validate those data.

Rishi Naik and Indrajeet Mandal are joint first authors. ObjectivesVenous thromboembolism (VTE), consisting of both pulmonary embolism (PE) and deep vein thromboses (DVT), remains a well-recognised complication of major urological cancer surgery. Several international guidelines recommend extended thromboprophylaxis (ETP) with LMWH, whereby the period of delivery is extended to the post-discharge period, where the majority of VTE occurs. In this literature review we investigate whether ETP should be indicated for all patients undergoing major urological cancer surgery, as well procedure specific data that may influence a clinician's decision. MethodsWe performed a search of six databases (PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycINFO, and British Nursing Index (BNI)) from inception to June 2019, for studies looking at adult patients who received VTE prophylaxis after surgery for a major urological malignancy. ResultsEighteen studies were analysed. VTE risk is highest in open and robotic Radical Cystectomy (RC) (2.6-11.6%) and ETP demonstrates a significant reduction in risk of VTE, but not a significant difference in Pulmonary Embolism (PE) or mortality. Risk of VTE in open Radical Prostatectomy (RP) (0.8-15.7%) is comparable to RC, but robotic RP (0.2-0.9%), open partial/radical nephrectomy (1.0-4.4%) and robotic partial/radical nephrectomy (0.7-3.9%) were lower risk. It has not been shown that ETP reduces VTE risk specifically for RP or nephrectomy. ConclusionThe decision to use ETP is a fine balance between variables such as VTE incidence, bleeding risk and perioperative morbidity/mortality. This balance should be assessed for each specific procedure type. While ETP still remains of net benefit for open RP as well as open and robotic RC, the balance is closer for minimally invasive RP as well as radical and partial nephrectomy. Due to a lack of procedure specific evidence for the use of ETP, adherence with national guidelines remains poor. Therefore, we advocate further studies directly comparing ETP vs standard prophylaxis, for specific procedure types, in order to allow clinicians to make a more informed decision in future.

Background Cancer patients with acute venous thromboembolism (VTE) receiving anticoagulant treatment have an increased bleeding risk. Objectives We performed a prespecified secondary analysis of the randomized, open-label, Phase III CATCH trial (NCT01130025) to assess the rate and sites of and the risk factors for clinically relevant bleeding (CRB). Patients/Methods Patients with active cancer and acute, symptomatic VTE received either tinzaparin 175 IU kg once daily or warfarin (target International Normalized Ratio [INR] of 2.0-3.0) for 6 months. Fisher's exact test was used to screen prespecified clinical risk factors; those identified as being significantly associated with an increased risk of CRB then underwent competing risk regression analysis of time to first CRB. Results Among 900 randomized patients, 138 (15.3%) had 180 CRB events. CRB occurred in 60 patients (81 events) in the tinzaparin group and in 78 patients (99 events) in the warfarin group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-0.89). Common bleeding sites were gastrointestinal (36.7%; n = 66), genitourinary (22.8%; n = 41), and nasal (10.0%; n = 18). In multivariate analysis, the risk of CRB increased with age > 75 years (HR 1.83, 95% CI 1.14-2.94) and intracranial malignancy (HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.07-3.62). In the warfarin group, 40.4% of CRB events occurred in patients with with an INR of < 3.0. A lower time in therapeutic range was associated with a higher risk of CRB. Conclusions CRB is a frequent complication in cancer patients with VTE during anticoagulant treatment, and is associated with age > 75 years and intracranial malignancy.

No abstract