Postoperative morbidity and mortality after anterior resection with preventive diverting loop ileostomy versus loop colostomy for rectal cancer: A updated systematic review and meta-analysis

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the perioperative morbidity after anterior resection with diverting loop ileostomy (LI) versus colostomy (LC) and its reversal for rectal cancer. The studies on the application of loop ileostomy versus loop colostomy in anterior resection published from January 2000 to January 2020 were searched in the databases of Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane library, and Clinical trials. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies were included according to inclusion criteria. Eight studies (2 RCTs and 6 cohort studies) totaling 1451 patients (821 LI and 630 LC) were included in the meta-analysis. The morbidity related to stoma formation and closure did not demonstrate significant differences. Significantly more LCs were complicated by stoma prolapse & retraction (OR:0.26,95%CI:0.11–0.60,P = 0.001), parastomal hernia (OR = 0.52,95%CI:0.30–0.88, P = 0.01), surgical site infection (SSI) (OR = 0.24,95%CI:0.11–0.49,P < 0.0001) and incisional hernias (OR = 0.39,95%CI:0.19–0.83,P = 0.01) than by LIs. Patients with LI demonstrated significantly more complications related to the stoma, such as dehydration (OR = 0.52,95%CI:0.30–0.88, P = 0.01) and ileus (OR = 2.23,95%CI:1.12–4.43, P = 0.02) than patients with LC. While after the subgroup analysis of different publication years, LI could reduce the risk of the morbidity after stoma formation in previous years group (P = 0.04) with a lower heterogeneity (I² = 37%); LC could reduce the incidence of parastomal dermatitis in recent years group (P < 0.0001) without heterogeneity in each subgroup (I² = 0%). Cumulative meta-analysis detected significant turning points in dehydration, SSI, and ileus. This meta-analysis recommends diverting LI in the anterior resection for rectal cancer, but there is a risk of dehydration, irritant dermatitis, and ileus.     

Do we need to routinely perform cavity shaving with breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis

AimsTo evaluate comparative outcomes of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) of breast cancer with and without cavity shaving.MethodsA systematic search of multiple electronic data sources was conducted, and all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing BCS with or without cavity shaving for breast cancer were included. Positive margin rate, second operation rate, operative time, post-operative haematoma, cosmetic appearance and budget cost were the evaluated outcome parameters for the meta-analysis.ResultsSix RCTs reporting a total number of 971 patients; 495 of these underwent BCS plus shaving (BCS + S), and 473 underwent BCS alone were included. BCS + S showed significantly lower positive margin rate (Risk Ratio [RR] 0.40, P = 0.00001) and second operation rate (RR 0.38, P = 0.00001). BCS + S demonstrated longer operative time than BCS (79 ± 4 min vs 67 ± 3 min, Mean Difference 12.14, P = 0.002), and there was no significant difference in the risk of post-operative haematoma (RR 0.33, P = 0.20).ConclusionBCS + S is superior to BCS in terms of positive margins rate and second operation rate. Operative time is longer when cavity shaving is performed.     

Review of Variables Associated With Positive Surgical Margins Using Scout Reflector Localizations for Breast Conservation Therapy

ObjectiveTo evaluate factors contributing to positive surgical margins associated with reflector guidance for patients undergoing breast conserving therapy for malignancy.Materials and MethodsA retrospective IRB-approved review of our institutional database was performed for malignant breast lesions preoperatively localized from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2020. The following data was recorded using electronic medical records: lesion type and grade, lesion location, reflector and wire placement modality, use of intraoperative ultrasound, margin status, patient age, family history, BMI, and final pathology. Statistical analysis was performed with univariate summary statistics and logistic regression. P < .05 was significant.ResultsA total of 606 image-guided pre-surgical localizations were performed for lumpectomies of breast malignancies. A total of 352 of 606 (58%) wire localizations and 254 of 606 (42%) SCOUT reflector localizations were performed. Sixty out of 352 (17%) of wire-localized patients had positive surgical margins, whereas forty-eight out of 254 (19%) of reflector-localized patients had positive surgical margins. (OR = 1.12, P value: .59). For reflector guided cases, the use of intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) was associated with decreased positive margin status (OR = 0 .28, 95% CI = [0.14, 0.58]) while in situ disease was associated with increased positive margin status (OR = 1.99, 95% CI = [1.05, 3.75]). No association between modality used for localization (mammography vs. ultrasound) and positive margin status was observed (OR = 0.63, 95% CI = [0.33, 1.19]). No association between positive margins and age, family history, tumor location and BMI was observed.ConclusionFor reflector guided surgeries, the use of IOUS was associated with decreased positive margins, by contrast the presence of ductal carcinoma in situ was associated with increased positive margins. There was no statistically significant difference in surgical outcomes for reflector-guided localization compared to wire localizations of the breast.     

Impact of multicentre diagnostic workup in patients with pancreatic cancer on repeated diagnostic investigations,time-to-diagnosis and time-to-treatment: A nationwide analysis

BackgroundDue to the centralization of pancreatic surgery, patients with suspected pancreatic cancer may undergo diagnostic workup in both a non-pancreatic centre and a pancreatic centre, i.e. multicentre workup. This retrospective study assessed whether multicentre diagnostic workup is associated with repeated diagnostics, delayed time-to-diagnosis, delayed time-to-treatment, survival and whether variation existed among pancreatic cancer networks.MethodsThis nationwide study included all patients diagnosed with non-metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in 2015, registered by the Netherlands Cancer Registry. A delayed time-to-diagnosis was defined as ≥3 weeks from initial hospital visit to final diagnosis. A delayed time-to-treatment was defined as ≥6 weeks from the first hospital visit to start of first tumour treatment. Multilevel logistic regression analyses and survival analyses were performed.ResultsIn total, 931 patients with non-metastatic PDAC were included. Overall, 175 patients (19%) underwent a multicentre diagnostic workup, which was significantly associated with repeated diagnostic investigations (OR = 6.31, 95% CI 4.13–9.64, P < 0.0001), a delayed time-to-diagnosis (OR = 2.66 95% CI 1.74–4.06, P < 0.001), and a delayed time-to-treatment (OR = 1.93 95% CI 1.12–3.31, P = 0.02), but not with decreased survival (HR = 1.09 95% CI 0.83–1.44; P = 0.532). Variation in outcomes per network was observed, especially for time-to-treatment, though the ICC was not statistically significant (P = 0.065).ConclusionMulticentre diagnostic workup for patients with PDAC is associated with repeated diagnostic investigations, a delayed time-to-diagnosis and delayed time-to-treatment compared to patients with monocentre workup. To reduce costs and improve treatment times, efforts should be made to improve network coordination, for example via network care pathways.     

Optimization of Wire-guided Technique With Bracketing Reduces Resection Volumes in Breast-conserving Surgery for Early Breast Cancer

BackgroundWire-guided localization (WGL) of early breast cancer can be facilitated using multiple wires, which is called bracketing wire-guided localization (BWL). The primary aim of this study is to compare BWL and conventional WGL regarding minimization of resection volumes without compromising margin status. Secondly, BWL is evaluated as an alternative method for intraoperative ultrasound (US) guidance in poorly definable breast tumors on US.Patients and MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study, patients with preoperatively diagnosed breast cancer undergoing wide local excision between January 2016 and December 2018 were analyzed. Patients with multifocal disease or neoadjuvant treatment were excluded from this study. Optimal resection with minimal healthy breast tissue removal was assessed using the calculated resection ratio (CRR).ResultsBWL was performed in 17 (9%) patients, WGL in 44 (22%), and US in 139 (70%). The rate of negative margins was comparable in all 3 groups. The CRR was significantly smaller for BWL (0.6) than WGL (1.3) in tumors larger than 1.5 cm. Additionally, BWL (0.8) led to smaller CRRs than US (1.7). This could be explained by the high number of small tumors (≤ 1.5 cm) in the US group for which greater CRRs are obtained than for large tumors (> 1.5 cm) (1.9 vs. 1.4; P = .005).ConclusionFor breast tumors larger than 1.5 cm, BWL achieves more optimal resection volumes without compromising margin status compared with WGL. Moreover, BWL seems a suitable alternative to US in patients with poorly ultrasound-visible breast tumors and patients with a small tumor in a (large) breast.     

Systematic review of risk factors for metastasis to para-aortic lymph nodes in gastric cancer

AimA meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the possible predictors of the positive PALN(para-aortic lymph nodes) for identifing specific patients who are at high risk of PALN metastases and for whom super-extended lymphadenectomy or pre-operative DCS therapy could be recommended.MethodsFive databases (PUBMED, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and the China Biological Medicine Database, CNKI) were searched that finally identified 11 candidate studies. Original data were abstracted from each study and used to calculate odds ratios. The random effects or fixed-effect model was used to combine odds ratios to determine the strength of the associations.ResultsIn this study, we eventually found 6 risk factors in the clinicopathologic characteristics including tumour located in the upper third(P < 0.01, OR = 2.19), tumour size exceeding 5 cm(P < 0.01, OR = 3.42), tumour infiltrating deeper than T2 (P < 0.01, OR = 2.07), tumour in the stage N2 and N3(P < 0.01, OR = 12.03), and tumour regarded as the poorly differentiated type by the histologic classification (P < 0.01, OR = 2.49)and the Borrman 3,4 type by the macroscopic classification(P < 0.01, OR = 2.58). Moreover, the metastasis of lower lymph nodal stations may be the predictors of the positive PALN especially NO.1, NO.3, NO.7 and NO.9 stations which had evidently higher odd ratios (OR>7) over others.ConclusionAlthough we cannot conduct a multivariate logistic regression to assess all risk factors together because of the limited information extracted from the studies, the risk factors above-mentioned may also have some indications especially when they have strong relationships with the positive PALN(OR>3). D2 Plus Para-Aortic Lymphadenectomy or pre-operative chemotherapy may be required for those patients who have a high risk for metastasis to PALN so that they may get better prognosis.     

Comparison of oncological outcomes and major complications between laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and abdominal radical hysterectomy for stage IB1 cervical cancer with a tumour size less than 2 cm

ObjectiveTo compare the oncological outcomes and major complications of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) for stage IB1 cervical cancer (FIGO 2009) with a tumour size less than 2 cm.MethodsWe retrospectively compared the oncological outcomes and major complications of 1207 stage IB1 cervical cancer patients with a tumour size less than 2 cm who received LRH (n = 546) or ARH (n = 661) in 37 hospitals.Results(1) There was no significant difference in 3-year overall survival (OS; 97.3% vs. 98.5%, P = 0.288) or 3-year disease-free survival (DFS; 95.1% vs. 95.4%, P = 0.792) between LRH (n = 546) and ARH (n = 661).(2) The rate of any 1 complication refers to the incidence of one or more complications in a patient, which was higher with LRH than ARH (OR = 4.047, 95% CI = 2.035–8.048, P < 0.001). Additionally, intraoperative complications occurred with LRH (OR = 12.313, 95% confidence intervals [CI] = 1.571–96.493, P = 0.017), and postoperative complications (OR = 3.652, 95% CI = 1.763–7.562, P < 0.001) were higher with LRH than ARH. The ureteral injury rate was higher with LRH than with ARH (1.50% vs. 0.20%, OR = 9.814, 95% CI = 1.224–78.712, P = 0.032). The ureterovaginal fistula rate was higher with LRH than ARH. The rates of obturator nerve injury, bladder injury, vesicovaginal fistula, rectovaginal fistula, venous thromboembolism, bowel obstruction, chylous leakage, pelvic haematoma, and haemorrhage were similar between the groups.ConclusionsThe oncological outcomes of LRH and ARH for stage IB1 cervical cancer patients with a tumour size less than 2 cm do not differ significantly. However, incidences of any 1 complication, intraoperative complications, and postoperative complications were higher with LRH than ARH, with complications manifesting mainly as ureteral injury and uterovaginal fistula.     

Determining the role of adjuvant therapy in Invasive Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms; a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundConflicting evidence exists regarding the role of adjuvant therapy for Invasive Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms (i-IPMN). This meta-analysis assessed whether adjuvant therapy improves Overall Survival (OS) in patients with resected i-IPMN.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. The primary endpoint was the effect of adjuvant therapy on OS. Secondary endpoint evaluated adjuvant therapy with regard to nodal disease, positive resection margins, tumour grade and differentiation. A meta-analysis of pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with an inverse variance and a random-effects model was performed. Risk of bias was determined with the GRADE approach and MINORS criteria.ResultsTen articles with a total of 3252 patients were included. No statistically significant difference in the OS was noted with adjuvant therapy for i-IPMN in the entire cohort (HR = 1; 95% CI = 0.75–1.35; P = 0.98). However, a survival benefit was noted in a subgroup of patients with an aggressive disease phenotype; nodal involvement (HR = 0.56; 95% CI = 0.39–0.79; P = 0.001) and advanced staged tumours (≥stage 2, HR = 1.42; 95% CI = 1.11–1.82; P = 0.005)ConclusionsThe concurrent evidence base for adjuvant therapy for i-IPMN is limited. After acknowledging the limitations of the data, the current literature suggests that adjuvant therapy should be reserved for patients with resected i-IPMN that have adverse tumour biology.     

Treatment strategies and outcomes of primary Myxofibrosarcomas in a large patients cohort

Backgroundthis study analysed primary myxofibrosarcoma (MFS) to investigate patient outcomes focusing on histopathologic margins and perioperative treatments.Patients and methodsdata from consecutive patients affected by primary and localized MFS of the extremities or trunk wall who underwent surgery (2002–2017) were analysed. Local recurrence (LR), amputation rate, incidence of distant metastasis (DM), and overall survival (OS) were studied.ResultsOf 293 included patients, 52 (17%) patients received perioperative treatments and 54 (18%) had positive microscopic histopathologic margins (R1). Median follow-up was 80 months (IQR, 49–109). 5-yr CCI of LR was 0.12 (SE: 0.02). Status of histopathologic margins (P < 0.001), tumour malignancy grade (P = 0.018) and size (P = 0023) were independent prognostic factor for LR. Nine amputations (amputation rate: 3%) were performed (N = 1 for primary tumour; N = 8 for LR). Larger tumour size (P = 0.015) and higher grade (P = 0.025) were independent prognostic factor for DM. 5-year OS was 0.84 (95%CI 0.79–0.88). Patient age (P = 0.008), tumour size (P = 0.013) and malignancy grade (P = 0.018) were independently associated to OS. In the subgroup of patients who had a re-excision for a primary MFS (N = 116, 40%), the presence of residual disease was not associated with LR, DM, or OS.Conclusionin this study 5-year LR, DM and OS were 12%, 17%, and 84%, respectively. One in six patients had a positive surgical margin, which was a prognostic factor for LR, while DM and OS were predicted by tumour grade and size. Findings from this large patient cohort may set benchmarks for investigating new treatment options for MFS.     

Systematic review of radioguided versus wire-guided localization in the treatment of non-palpable breast cancers

One-third of breast cancers present as non-palpable lesions. The current gold standard treatment for these cancers is localized wide local excision using wire-guided localization (WGL). WGL has drawbacks including technical and scheduling issues resulting in the development of alternative radioguided techniques (RGL). A systematic review was performed to identify studies comparing RGL and WGL. The outcomes of surgical margin status, re-operation rates, surgical operative time, volume and excised specimen weight and successful sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) rates were evaluated. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95 % confidence intervals were estimated using fixed-effects analyses and random-effects analyses in case of statistically significant heterogeneity (p < 0.05). Seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) matching the inclusion criteria were identified. The pooled ORs for involved surgical margin status were 0.78 (95 % CI, 0.52–1.17); for re-operations 0.74 (95 % CI, 0.49–1.11) and for successful SLNB 1.29 (95 % CI, 0.66–2.53). There was a significant difference in surgical operating time in favour of RGL (mean difference (MD), ?2.95; 95 % CI, ?4.43, ?1.47) and a significant difference in excised specimen volume, favouring WGL (MD, 6.79; 95 % CI, 0.03, 13.56). The MD for a specimen weight of ?3.00 (95 % CI, ?15.15, 9.15) showed no significant difference between RGL and WGL. RGL has a reduced operating time, but larger volume excisions compared to WGL. There is insufficient evidence to support the uptake of RGL over WGL, and larger, adequately powered, multi-centre RCTs are required.     

Intra-operative ultrasound versus wire-guided localization in the surgical management of non-palpable breast cancers: systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction The current standard of treatment for non-palpable breast cancers is wire-guided localization (WGL). WGL has its drawbacks and alternatives such as radio-guided surgery (RGL) and intra-operative ultrasound (IOUS) have been developed. The clinical effectiveness of all forms of RGL has been assessed against WGL in previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses. We performed the first systematic review and meta-analysis of IOUS in the management of non-palpable breast cancers. Methods Studies were considered eligible for inclusion in this systematic review if they (1) assessed the role of surgeon-performed IOUS for the treatment of non-palpable breast cancers and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and (2) specified surgical margin excision status. Those studies, which were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or cohort studies with comparison WGL groups were included in the meta-analysis. For those studies included in the meta-analysis, pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using fixed-effects analyses and random-effects analyses in case of statistically significant heterogeneity (p < 0.05). Results Eighteen studies reported data on IOUS in 1,328 patients with non-palpable breast cancer and DCIS. Nine cohort studies with control WGL groups and one RCT were included in the meta-analysis. Successful localization rates varied between 95 and 100 % in all studies and there was a statistically significant difference in the rates of involved surgical margins in favour of IOUS with pooled OR 0.52 (95 % CI 0.38–0.71). Conclusion Compared with WGL, IOUS reduces involved surgical margin rates. Adequately powered RCTs are required to validate these findings.     

Improved outcomes of major laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

BackgroundMinor laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is currently becoming standard treatment option for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) while major LLR is still challenging. Recent advancement of surgical techniques has enabled surgeons to perform major LLR. This study compared the outcomes of major LLR for HCC before and after the adaptation of technological improvements.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 141 patients who underwent major LLR for HCC from January 2004 to July 2018.32 open conversion cases were excluded. We divided the patients into two groups according to the date of operation: Group 1 (n = 38) and Group 2 (n = 71) who underwent major LLR before and after 2012, when advanced techniques including the use of intercostal trocars, Pringle maneuver, and semi-lateral position of patient were introduced. We also compared these patients including open conversion cases (n = 141) with those who underwent major open liver resection (OLR; n = 131) during the same period.ResultsMean operative time (413.0 min vs 331.0 min; P = 0.009), transfusion rate (31.6% vs 11.3%, P = 0.009) and hospital stay (9.8 days vs 8.5 days; P = 0.001) were significantly less in Group 2. Intraoperative blood loss (1269.7 ml vs 844.5 ml; P = 0.341) and postoperative complication (15.8% vs 23.9%; P = 0.320) were not significantly different between the groups. Although tumor size in OLR group and type of resection was different, transfusion rate (36.6% vs 24.1%; P = 0.026), postoperative complication (41.2% vs 25.5%; P = 0.007), and hospital stay (17.2 days vs 10.0 days; P < 0.001) were significantly lower in LLR group.ConclusionDevelopment of surgical techniques have gradually improved the surgical outcomes of the laparoscopic major liver resection.     

Adjuvant interferon-α for the treatment of high-risk melanoma: An individual patient data meta-analysis

BackgroundMany randomised trials assessing interferon-α (IFN-α) as adjuvant therapy for high-risk malignant melanoma have been undertaken. To better assess the role of IFN-α, an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of these trials was undertaken.MethodsIPD was sought from all randomised trials of adjuvant IFN-α versus no IFN-α for high-risk melanoma. Primary outcomes were event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS). Standard methods for quantitative IPD meta-analysis were used. Subgroup analyses by dose, duration of treatment and various patient and disease-specific parameters were performed.FindingsFifteen trials were included in the analysis (eleven with IPD). EFS was significantly improved with IFN-α (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.86, CI 0.81–0.91; P < 0.00001), as was OS (HR = 0.90, CI 0.85–0.97; P = 0.003). The absolute differences in EFS at 5 and 10 years were 3.5% and 2.7%, and for OS were 3.0% and 2.8% respectively in favour of IFN-α. There was no evidence that the benefit of IFN-α differed depending on dose or duration of treatment, or by age, gender, site of primary tumour, disease stage, Breslow thickness, or presence of clinical nodes. Only for ulceration was there evidence of an interaction (test for heterogeneity: P = 0.04 for EFS; P = 0.002 for OS); only patients with ulcerated tumours appeared to obtain benefit from IFN-α.ConclusionThis meta-analysis provides clear evidence that adjuvant IFN-α significantly reduces the risk of relapse and improves survival and shows no benefit for higher doses compared to lower doses. The increased benefit in patients with ulcerated tumours, and lack of benefit in patients without ulceration, needs further investigation.     

Systematic review of radioguided surgery for non-palpable breast cancer

Background

This systematic review examines whether radioguided localization surgery (RGL) (radioguided occult lesion localization - ROLL and radioguided seed localization - RSL) for non-palpable breast cancer lesions produces lower positive margin rates than standard wire-guided localization surgery.

Methods

We performed a comprehensive literature review to identify clinical studies using either ROLL or RSL. Included studies examined invasive or in situ BC and reported pathologically assessed margin status or specimen volume/weight. Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility and quality and abstracted relevant data on patient and surgical outcomes. Quantitative data analyses were performed.

Results

Fifty-two clinical studies on ROLL (n = 46) and RSL (n = 6) were identified. Twenty-seven met our inclusion criteria: 12 studies compared RGL to WGL and 15 studies were single cohorts using RGL. Ten studies were included in the quantitative analyses. Data for margin status and re-operation rates from 4 randomized controlled trials (RCT; n = 238) and 6 cohort studies were combined giving a combined odds ratio (OR) of 0.367 and 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.277 to 0.487 (p < 0.001) for margins status and OR 0.347, 95% CI: 0.250 to 0.481 (p < 0.001) for re-operation rates.

Conclusions

The results of this systematic review of RGL versus WGL demonstrate that RGL technique produces lower positive margins rates and fewer re-operations. While this review is limited by the small size and quality of RCTs, the odds ratios suggest that RGL may be a superior technique to guide surgical resection of non-palpable breast cancers. These results should be confirmed by larger, multi-centered RCTs.     

Impact of BRAF mutations on clinical outcomes following liver surgery for colorectal liver metastases: An updated meta-analysis

BackgroundData regarding clinical outcomes of patients undergoing hepatic resection for BRAF-mutated colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) are scarce. Most of the studies report an impaired median overall survival (OS) in BRAF-mutated patients, but controversial Results regarding both recurrence-free survival (RFS) and recurrence patterns. The purpose of this updated meta-analysis was to better precise the impact of BRAF mutations on clinical outcomes following liver surgery for CRLM study, especially on recurrence.MethodsA systematic literature review was performed to identify articles reporting clinical outcomes including both OS and RFS, recurrence patterns, and clinicopathological details of patients who underwent complete liver resection for CRLM, stratified according to BRAF mutational status.ResultsThirteen retrospective studies, including 5192 patients, met the inclusion criteria. The analysis revealed that both OS (OR = 1.981; 95% CI = [1.613–2.432]) and RFS (OR = 1.49; 95% CI [1.01–2.21]) were impaired following liver surgery for CRLM in BRAF-mutated patients. Risks of both hepatic (OR = 0.42; 95% CI [0.18–0.98]) and extrahepatic recurrences (OR = 0.53; 95% CI [0.33–0.83] were significantly higher in BRAF-mutated patients. These patients tended to have higher rates of right-sided colon primary tumors, primary positive lymph nodes, and multiple CRLM.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis confirms that BRAF mutations impair both OS and RFS following liver surgery. Therefore, BRAF mutational status should probably be included in further prognostic scores for the assessment of the expected clinical outcomes following surgery for CRLM.     

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing surgical and oncological outcomes of upper rectal,rectosigmoid and sigmoid tumours

AimManagement paradigms for tumours from the sigmoid colon to the lower rectum vary significantly. The upper rectum (UR) represents the transition point both anatomically and in treatment protocols. Above the UR is clearly defined and managed as colon cancer and below is managed as rectal cancer. This study compares outcomes between sigmoid, rectosigmoid and UR tumours to establish if differences exist in operative and oncological outcomes.MethodsElectronic databases were searched for published studies with comparative data on peri-operative and oncological outcome for upper rectal and sigmoid/rectosigmoid (SRS) tumours treated without neoadjuvant radiation. The search adhered to PRISMA guidelines (Preferred Reporting Items in Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. Data was combined using random-effects models.ResultsSeven comparative series examined outcomes in 4355 patients. There was no difference in ASA grade (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.99–1.67; P = 0.06), T3/T4 tumours (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.95–1.63; P = 0.12), or lymph node positivity (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.70–1.36; P = 0.87). UR cancers had higher rates of operative morbidity (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.55–0.93; P = 0.01) and anastomotic leak (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.31–0.71; P = 0.0004). There was no difference in local recurrence (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.37–1.08; P = 0.10). SRS tumours had lower rates of distant recurrence (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.68–1.0; P = 0.05). Rectosigmoid operative and cancer outcomes were closer to UR than sigmoid.ConclusionsBased on existing data, UR and rectosigmoid tumours have higher morbidity, leak rates and distant recurrence than more proximal tumours.     

Robot-assisted versus thoracolaparoscopic oesophagectomy for locally advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy

IntroductionRobot-assisted oesophagectomy (RAE) and thoracolaparoscopic oesophagectomy (TLE) are surgical techniques for the treatment of oesophageal cancer. This study aimed to compare the perioperative and mid-term outcomes of RAE versus TLE for patients with locally advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT).MethodsConsecutive patients receiving nCRT plus RAE or TLE were retrospectively included in this single-institution study from January 2016 to January 2021. Perioperative outcomes were compared and survival analysis was performed.ResultsThis study enrolled 251 patients, 80 (31.9%) in RAE and 171 (68.1%) in TLE. The conversion rate was equivalent in RAE versus TLE (3.8% vs 2.9%, P = 1). Median operative time in RAE was significantly shorter than that in TLE (254 vs 289 min, P < 0.001). Compared to TLE, RAE harvested more lymph nodes along the recurrent laryngeal nerve [4 (3–6) vs 3 (1–5), P < 0.001]. Overall complications were similar in RAE compared to TLE (38.8% vs 38.0%, P = 0.911). No statistically significant difference in disease-free survival (log-rank P = 0.721) or overall survival (log-rank P = 0.325) was found between groups.ConclusionsCompared to TLE, RAE could achieve shorter operative duration and better lymph nodes dissection along the bilateral RLN for locally advanced ESCC after nCRT, with comparable short-term outcomes. A long-term survival remains to be verified.     

STK15 F31I polymorphism is associated with breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis involving 25,014 subjects

Published data on the association between STK15 F31I polymorphism and breast cancer risk are inconclusive. In order to derive a more precise estimation of the relationship, a meta-analysis was performed. Medline, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Chinese Biomedicine Database were searched. Crude ORs with 95% CIs were used to assess the strength of association between the STK15 F31I polymorphism and breast cancer risk. The pooled ORs were performed for codominant model (FI vs. FF; II vs. FF), dominant model (FI + II vs. FF), and recessive model (II vs. FI + FF), respectively. A total of 10 studies including 10,537 cases and 14,477 controls were involved in this meta-analysis. Overall, significantly elevated breast cancer risk was associated with II variant genotype in homozygote comparison and recessive genetic model when all studies were pooled into the meta-analysis (for II vs. FF: OR = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.10–1.37; for recessive model: OR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.05–1.40). In the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, significantly increased risks were found for II allele carriers among Caucasians (for II vs. FF: OR = 1.24, 95% CI = 1.08–1.43; for recessive model: OR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.00–1.45); significantly increased risks were also found among Asians for II versus FF (OR = 1.21; 95% CI = 1.01–1.45). In conclusion, this meta-analysis suggests that the STK15 31II allele is a low-penetrant risk factor for developing breast cancer.     

A Comparison of the Oncological Outcomes After Breast-Conserving Surgery With or Without Latissimus Dorsi Myocutaneous Flap Reconstruction for Breast Cancer

BackgroundThere is little information on the oncological outcomes of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) with immediate reconstruction using a latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap (LDMF) for breast cancer compared with BCS alone.Patients and MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study from a single institution comparing the margin positivity rates after initial surgery, re-excision rates, and local recurrence (LR) between BCS with immediate LDMF reconstruction (n = 145) and BCS alone (n = 1040) performed from 2012 to 2017 for newly diagnosed stage 0-3 breast cancer.ResultsThe positive rates of surgical margin after initial surgery were significantly lower in the BCS with LDMF group than in the BCS alone group (4.1 vs. 10.8%; P = .006). There were no marked differences in the re-excision rates between the BCS with LDMF and BCS alone groups (P = .1). At a median follow-up of 61 months, the surgical method (BCS with LD vs. BCS alone) was not associated with the LR-free survival after adjusting for various clinicopathologic factors (P = .8).ConclusionOur findings suggest that BCS with immediate LDMF reconstruction is oncologically safe for breast cancer compared with BCS alone. However, further studies are needed.