Use of buccal mucosa patch graft for recurrent large urethrocutaneous fistula after hypospadias repair

INTRODUCTION: To assess the effectiveness of buccal mucosa patch graft in the treatment of recurrent large urethrocutaneous fistula after hypospadias repair. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A free graft of buccal mucosa was used for closure in 7 boys (mean age 4.8 years) with large (>4 mm) urethocutaneous fistula. Four fistulas were in the midshaft, 2 of them penoscrotal and 1 coronal type. All patients had undergone at least two previous unsuccessful fistula repairs, and 3 of them had undergone three attempts for closure. Fistula repairs were similar in all cases. RESULTS: The repair was successful in 6 out of 7 cases, and in these cases the urinary stream was good after the removal of the catheter. The unsuccessful case was the coronal one. CONCLUSION: Based on our experience it seems that in cases with recurrent large fistula after hypospadias reconstruction, the use of buccal mucosa patch graft for closure is a good treatment choice.     

Electron and High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy Boost in the Conservative Treatment of Stage I–II Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To evaluate the effect of electron and high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR BT) boost on local tumor control (LTC), side effects and cosmesis after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in a prospective randomized study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 207 women with stage I-II breast cancer who underwent BCS were treated by 50 Gy irradiation to the whole breast and then randomly assigned to receive either a boost to the tumor bed (n = 104) or no further radiotherapy (n = 103). Boost treatments consisted of either 16 Gy electron irradiation (n = 52) or 12-14,25 Gy HDR BT (n = 52). Breast cancer-related events, side effects, and cosmetic results were assessed. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 5.3 years, the crude rate of local recurrences was 6.7% (7/104) with and 15.5% (16/103) without boost. The 5-year probability of LTC, relapse-free survival (RFS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS) was 92.7% vs. 84.9% (p = 0.049), 76.6% vs. 66.2% (p = 0.044), and 90.4% vs. 82.1% (p = 0.053), respectively. There was no significant difference in LTC between patients treated with electron or HDR BT boost (94.2% vs. 91.4%; p = 0.74). On multivariate analysis, patient age < 40 years (RR: 4.53), positive margin status (RR: 4.17), and high mitotic activity index (RR: 3.60) were found to be significant risk factors for local recurrence. The incidence of grade 2-3 side effects was higher in the boost arm (17.3% vs. 7.8%; p = 0.03). However, the rate of excellent/good cosmetic results was similar for the two arms (85.6% vs 91.3%; p = 0.14). Cosmesis was rated as excellent/good in 88.5% of patients treated with HDR BT and 82.7% of patients with electron boost (p = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Boost dose significantly improves LTC and RFS in patients treated with BCS and radiotherapy. In spite of the higher incidence of late side effects in the boost arm, boost dose is strongly recommended for patients at high risk for local recurrence. Positive or close margin status, high mitotic activity index, and young patient age should be viewed as absolute indications for tumor bed boost. LTC and cosmesis are excellent and similar to patients boosted with either HDR BT or electrons.     

Radiotherapy Confined to the Tumor Bed Following Breast Conserving Surgery

BACKGROUND: The standard technique of radiotherapy (RT) after breast conserving surgery (BCS) is to treat the entire breast up to a total dose of 45-50 Gy with or without tumor bed boost. The majority of local recurrences occur in close proximity to the tumor bed. Thus, the necessity of whole breast radiotherapy has been questioned, and several centers have evaluated the feasibility and efficacy of sole tumor bed irradiation. The aim of this study was to review the current status, controversies, and future prospects of tumor bed irradiation alone after breast conserving surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Published prospective trials evaluating the feasibility and efficacy of radiotherapy confined to the tumor bed following breast conserving surgery were reviewed in order to analyze treatment results. RESULTS: In three earlier studies, using tumor bed radiotherapy for unselected patients, the incidence of intra-breast relapse was reported in the range of 15.6-37%. However, in nine prospective phase I-II trials, sole brachytherapy (BT) with different dose rates, strict patient selection, and meticulous quality assurance, resulted in 95.6-100% local control rates. To date, only one phase III protocol has been initiated comparing the efficacy of tumor bed brachytherapy alone with conventional whole breast radiotherapy. The ideal extend of the planning target volume (PTV) for tumor bed radiotherapy alone has not been established yet. In most series, PTV was defined as the excision cavity with generous (1-3 cm) safety margins. Minimal requirement for PTV localization is the use of titanium clips to mark the walls of the excision cavity intraoperatively, but the combination of clip demarcation and three-dimensional (3-D) visual information obtained from cross-sectional images seems to be the best method to determine the target volume. 3-D virtual brachytherapy is also a promising method to minimize the chance of geographic miss. Recently developed techniques, such as intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT), as well as accelerated 3-D conformal external beam radiation therapy (3-D-CRT) were also found to be feasible for tumor bed radiotherapy alone. CONCLUSIONS: In spite of the existing arguments against limiting radiotherapy to the tumor bed after breast conserving surgery, results of phase I-II studies suggest that tumor bed radiotherapy alone might be an appropriate treatment option for selected breast cancer patients. Whole breast radiotherapy remains the standard radiation modality used in the treatment of breast cancer, and brachytherapy as the sole modality should be considered as investigational. Further phase-III trials are suggested to determine the equivalence of sole tumor bed radiotherapy, compared with whole breast radiotherapy. Preliminary results with recently developed techniques (CT-image based conformal brachytherapy, 3-D virtual brachytherapy, IORT, 3-D-CRT) are promising. However, more experience is required to define whether these methods might improve outcome for patients treated with tumor bed radiotherapy alone.     

Electron and High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy Boost in the Conservative Treatment of Stage I-II Breast Cancer First Results of the Randomized Budapest Boost Trial

Background and Aims: To evaluate the effect of electron and high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR BT) boost on local tumor control (LTC), side effects and cosmesis after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in a prospective randomized study. Patients and Methods: 207 women with stage I-II breast cancer who underwent BCS were treated by 50 Gy irradiation to the whole breast and then randomly assigned to receive either a boost to the tumor bed (n = 104) or no further radiotherapy (n = 103). Boost treatments consisted of either 16 Gy electron irradiation (n = 52) or 12-14,25 Gy HDR BT (n = 52). Breast cancer-related events, side effects, and cosmetic results were assessed. Results: At a median follow-up of 5.3 years, the crude rate of local recurrences was 6.7% (7/104) with and 15.5% (16/103) without boost. The 5-year probability of LTC, relapse-free survival (RFS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS) was 92.7% vs. 84.9% (p = 0.049), 76.6% vs. 66.2% (p = 0.044), and 90.4% vs. 82.1% (p = 0.053), respectively. There was no significant difference in LTC between patients treated with electron or HDR BT boost (94.2% vs. 91.4%; p = 0.74). On multivariate analysis, patient age < 40 years (RR: 4.53), positive margin status (RR: 4.17), and high mitotic activity index (RR: 3.60) were found to be significant risk factors for local recurrence. The incidence of grade 2-3 side effects was higher in the boost arm (17.3% vs. 7.8%; p = 0.03). However, the rate of excellent/good cosmetic results was similar for the two arms (85.6% vs 91.3%; p = 0.14). Cosmesis was rated as excellent/good in 88.5% of patients treated with HDR BT and 82.7% of patients with electron boost (p = 0.29). Conclusions: Boost dose significantly improves LTC and RFS in patients treated with BCS and radiotherapy. In spite of the higher incidence of late side effects in the boost arm, boost dose is strongly recommended for patients at high risk for local recurrence. Positive or close margin status, high mitotic activity index, and young patient age should be viewed as absolute indications for tumor bed boost. LTC and cosmesis are excellent and similar to patients boosted with either HDR BT or electrons. Hintergrund und Ziel: In einer prospektiv randomisierten Studie werden die Effekte eines Elektronenboosts und eines High-Dose-Rate-Brachytherapie-(HDR-BT-)Boosts bezüglich lokaler Tumorkontrolle (LTC), Nebenwirkungen und kosmetischer Ergebnisse nach brusterhaltender Operation (BCS) evaluiert. Patienten und Methodik: 207 Patientinnen mit Brustkarzinomen im Stadium I-II wurden einer BCS zugeführt. Postoperativ erfolgte eine perkutane Radiatio der gesamten Brust bis 50 Gy. Daran schloss sich willkürlich entweder eine Boostbestrahlung des Tumorbetts (n = 104) oder keine weitere Radiatio (n = 103) an. Die Boostbestrahlung erfolgte perkutan mit 16 Gy Elektronen (n = 52) oder in Form einer HDR-BT mit 12-14,25 By (n = 52). Untersucht wurden LTC, Nebenwirkungen und kosmetische Ergebnisse. Ergebnisse: Die mediane Nachbeobachtungszeit betrug 5,3 Jahre. Die Lokalrezidivrate lag mit Boostbestrahlung bei 6,7% (7/104), ohne Boost bei 15,5% (16/103). Die 5-Jahres-Überlebensrate für LTC, für die rezidivfreie Überlebenszeit (RFS) und für die krebsspezifische Überlebenszeit (CSS) betrugen 92,7% vs. 84,9% (p = 0,049), 76,6% vs. 66,2% (p = 0,044) und 90,4% vs. 82,1% (p = 0,053). Bezüglich der LTC bestand kein signifikanter Unterschied zwischen Patienten, die mit einem Elektronen- oder HDR-BT-Boost behandelt wurden (94,2% vs. 91,4$; p = 0,74). Die multivariate Analyse zeigte, dass Faktoren wie Patientenalter > 40 Jahre (RR: 4,53), positive Resektionsränder (RR: 4,17) und ein hoher Mitoseaktivitätsindex (RR: 3.60) das Risiko eines lokalen Rezidivs signifikant erhöhen. Die Inzidenz von Nebenwirkungen Grad 2-3 war im Boost-Arm höher (17,3% vs. 7,8%; p = 0,03). Allerdings waren die sehr guten kosmetischen Ergebnisse in beiden Armen gleich (85,6% bs. 91,3%, p = 0,14). Sehr gute kosmetische Ergebnisse wurden bei 88,5% der Patientinnen mit HDR-BT-Boost und 82,7% der Patientinnen mit Elektronenboost erreicht (p = 0,29). Schlussfolgerungen: Die Boost-Dosis verbessert signifikant LTC und RFS bei Patientinnen, die einer BCS und anschließender Radiatio zugeführt wurden. Obwohl eine höhere Inzidenz an Spätnebenwirkungen im Boost-Arm gefunden wurde, wird eine Boost-Dosis für Patientinnen mit hohem Risiko für die Entwicklung eines Lokalrezidivs empfohlen. Unserer Meinung nach ist bei Faktoren wie positive Schnittränder, schmaler Sicherheitssaum, hoher Mitoseaktivitätsindex und niedriges Patientenalter, die absolute Indikation zur Boost-Bestrahlung des Tumorbetts gegeben. LTC und die kosmetischen Ergebnisse sind sehr gut und unterscheiden sich nicht in Bezug auf Elektronenboost oder HDR-BT-Boost.     

Reconstruction of cervical esophageal anastomosis using median sternotomy

We performed cervical oesophageal anastomosis in 153 patients in 10 years. In 11 patients reconstruction or delayed anastomosis was performed through median sternotomy because cervical approach was not suitable. Reoperations were the following: 7 oesophageal stenosis which couldn't be dilated, 2 necrosis of the transplanted organ and 2 because of delayed anastomosis. 8 patients had oesophageal tumors and 3 erosive fluid reflux. During median sternotomy the transplanted organ was injured twice. In 9 patients after reconstruction dysphagia disappeared, in one pharyngo-ileostomy stenosis was noticed and one of the patients died because of ARDS after a leak.     

Electron Microscopic Characteristics of β2-Microglobulin Amyloid Deposits in Long-Term Haemodialysis

The electron microscopic features of β2-microglobulin amyloid, deposited in the synovial membrane, are presented and discussed. The patient, a 69-year-old woman underwent chronic hemodialysis for 3 years. Because of constant pain and destructive arthropathy, endoprosthesis of the hip joints were implanted. Extra- and intracellular filamentous–fibrillar amyloid deposits have been demonstrated in ultrathin sections. The extracellular amyloid deposits showed a loose, filamentous or fibrillar structure at the periphery and a dense central core. The loose, filamentous structure may represent an early stage of fresh, newly deposited β2-microglobulin amyloid, while the condensed and fragmented amyloid filaments may be an advanced “mature” stage of amyloid deposition.     

Ultrastructural Identification of Primary Tumor Site from Bone Metastases

The value of electron microscopy is demonstrated by ultrastructural identification of primary tumor site from bone metastases in 2 patients.