Search

Objective: To describe the management of pathogenic CDH1 variant carriers (pCDH1vc) within the FREGAT (FRench Eso-GAsTric tumor) network. Primary objective focused on clinical outcomes and pathological findings, Secondary objective was to identify risk factor predicting postoperative morbidity (POM)., Background: Prophylactic total gastrectomy (PTG) remains the recommended option for gastric cancer risk management in pCDH1vc with, however, endoscopic surveillance as an alternative., Methods: A retrospective observational multicenter study was carried out between 2003 and 2021. Data were reported as median (interquartile range) or as counts (proportion). Usual tests were used for univariate analysis. Risk factors of overall and severe POM (ie, Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or more) were identified with a binary logistic regression., Results: A total of 99 patients including 14 index cases were reported from 11 centers. Median survival among index cases was 12.0 (7.6-16.4) months with most of them having peritoneal carcinomatosis at diagnosis (71.4%). Among the remaining 85 patients, 77 underwent a PTG [median age=34.6 (23.7-46.2), American Society of Anesthesiologists score 1: 75%] mostly via a minimally invasive approach (51.9%). POM rate was 37.7% including 20.8% of severe POM, with age 40 years and above and low-volume centers as predictors ( P =0.030 and 0.038). After PTG, the cancer rate on specimen was 54.5% (n=42, all pT1a) of which 59.5% had no cancer detected on preoperative endoscopy (n=25)., Conclusions: Among pCDH1vc, index cases carry a dismal prognosis. The risk of cancer among patients undergoing PTG remained high and unpredictable and has to be balanced with the morbidity and functional consequence of PTG., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the survival of patients with stage II obstructing colon cancer (OCC) who had adjuvant chemotherapy with those who did not., Summary Background Data: The need for adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colon cancer is still debated., Methods: All consecutive patients treated for a stage II OCC in a curative intent (with primary tumor resection) between January 2000 and December 2015 were included in this retrospective, multicenter cohort study which included a propensity score analysis using an odds of treatment weighting (Average Treatment effect on the Treated, ATT). The endpoint was the comparison between the 2 groups for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) according to whether or not patients received adjuvant chemotherapy., Results: During the study period, 504 patients underwent a curative colectomy for a stage II OCC. Among these patients, 179 (35.5%) had adjuvant chemotherapy and 325 (64.5%) had no adjuvant treatment. Among the 179 patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy, 108 patients (60%) received oxaliplatin based regimen and 99 patients (55%) completed all scheduled cycles. At multivariate analysis, after weighting by the odds (ATT analysis) and adjustment, adjuvant chemotherapy after resection of a stage II OCC was associated with improvements in OS [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.42 (0.17-0.99), P = 0.0498] and DFS [HR = 0.57 (0.37-0.88), P = 0.0116]., Conclusion: This study suggests that adjuvant chemotherapy after curative resection of stage II OCC may improve oncological outcomes., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate whether systematic mesh implantation upon primary colostomy creation was effective to prevent PSH., Summary of Background Data: Previous randomized trials on prevention of PSH by mesh placement have shown contradictory results., Methods: This was a prospective, randomized controlled trial in 18 hospitals in France on patients aged ≥18 receiving a first colostomy for an indication other than infection. Participants were randomized by blocks of random size, stratified by center in a 1:1 ratio to colostomy with or without a synthetic, lightweight monofilament mesh. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded to patient group. The primary endpoint was clinically diagnosed PSH rate at 24 months of the intention-to-treat population. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01380860., Results: From November 2012 to October 2016, 200 patients were enrolled. Finally, 65 patients remained in the no mesh group (Group A) and 70 in the mesh group (Group B) at 24 months with the most common reason for drop-out being death (n = 41). At 24 months, PSH was clinically detected in 28 patients (28%) in Group A and 30 (31%) in Group B [P = 0.77, odds ratio = 1.15 95% confidence interval = (0.62;2.13)]. Stoma-related complications were reported in 32 Group A patients and 37 Group B patients, but no mesh infections. There were no deaths related to mesh insertion., Conclusion: We failed to show efficiency of a prophylactic mesh on PSH rate. Placement of a mesh in a retro-muscular position with a central incision to allow colon passage cannot be recommended to prevent PSH. Optimization of mesh location and reinforcement material should be performed., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to report the 3-year survival results of the GRECCAR-6 trial., Summary Background Data: Current data on the effect of an extended interval between radiochemotherapy (RCT) and resection for rectal cancer on the rate of complete pathological response (pCR = ypT0N0) is controversial. Furthermore, its effect on oncological outcomes is unknown., Methods: The GRECCAR-6 trial was a phase III, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, controlled trial. Patients with cT3/T4 or TxN+ tumors of the mid or lower rectum who had received RCT (45-50 Gy with 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine) were included and randomized into a 7- or 11-week waiting period. Primary endpoint was the pCR rate. Secondary endpoints were 3-year overall (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence rates., Results: A total of 265 patients from 24 participating centers were enrolled. A total of 253 patients underwent a mesorectal excision. Overall pCR rate was 17% (43/253). Mean follow-up from surgical resection was 32 ± 8 months. Twenty-four deaths occurred with an 89% OS at 3 years. DFS was 68.7% at 3 years (75 recurrences). Three-year local and distant recurrences were 7.9% and 23.8%, respectively. The randomization group had no impact on the 3-year OS (P = 0.8868) or DFS (P = 0.9409). Distant (P = 0.7432) and local (P = 0.3944) recurrences were also not influenced by the waiting period. DFS was independently influenced by 3 factors: circumferential radial margin (CRM) ≤1 mm [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.03; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.17-3.51], ypT3-T4 (HR = 2.69; 95% CI, 1.19-6.08) and positive lymph nodes (HR = 3.62; 95% CI, 1.89-6.91)., Conclusion: Extending the waiting period by 4 weeks following RCT has no influence on the oncological outcomes of T3/T4 rectal cancers.

Objective: To compare outcome of single-port laparoscopy (SPL) and multiport laparoscopy (MPL) laparoscopy for colonic surgery., Summary of Background Data: Benefits of SPL over MPL are yet to be demonstrated in large randomized trials., Methods: In this prospective, double-blinded, superiority trial, patients undergoing laparoscopic colonic resection for benign or malignant disease were randomly assigned to SPL or MPL (NCT01959087). Primary outcome was length of theoretical hospital stay (LHS)., Results: One hundred twenty-eight patients were randomized and 125 analyzed: 62 SPL and 63 MPL, including 91 right (SPL: n = 44, 71%; MPL: n = 47, 75%) and 34 left (SPL: n = 18, 29%; MPL: n = 16, 25%) colectomies, performed for Crohn disease (n = 53, 42%), cancer (n = 36, 29%), diverticulitis (n = 21, 17%), or benign neoplasia (n = 15, 12%). Additional port insertion was required in 5 (8%) SPL patients and conversion to laparotomy occurred in 7 patients (SPL: n = 3, 5%; MPL: n = 4, 7%; P = 1.000). Total length of skin incision was significantly shorter in the SPL group [SPL: 56 ± 41 (range, 30-300) mm; MPL: 87 ± 40 (50-250) mm; P < 0.001]. Procedure duration, intraoperative complication rate, postoperative 30-day morbidity, postoperative pain, and time to first bowel movement were similar between the groups, leading to similar theoretical LHS (SPL: 6 ± 3 days; MPL: 6 ± 2; P = 0.298). At 6 months, quality of life was similar between groups, but patients from the SPL group were significantly more satisfied with their scar aspect than patients from the MPL group (P = 0.003)., Conclusion: SPL colectomy does not confer any additional benefit other than cosmetic result, as compared to MPL.

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess whether association of laparoscopic approach and full fast track multimodal (FFT) management can reduce postoperative morbidity after colorectal cancer surgery, as compared to laparoscopic approach with limited fast-track program (LFT)., Summary of Background Data: Recent advances in colorectal cancer surgery are introduction of laparoscopy and FFT implementation., Methods: Patients eligible for elective laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery were randomized into 2 groups: FFT or LFT care (with only early oral intake and mobilization starting on Day 1). Primary outcome was postoperative 30-day morbidity, according to Clavien-Dindo classification., Results: Two hundred seventy patients were randomized and 263 were analyzed: 130 in FFT group and 133 in LFT group, including 106 colon (FFT: n = 52 and LFT: n = 54) and 157 rectal cancer (FFT: n = 78 and LFT: n = 79). Postoperative 30-day mortality was nil. Overall postoperative 30-day morbidity did not show any difference between the groups (FFT: 35% vs LFT: 29%, P = 0.290), neither regarding the overall population, nor in the colon (FFT: 23% vs LFT: 19%, P = 0.636) or rectal (FFT: 44% vs LFT: 35%, P = 0.330) cancer subgroups. Severe postoperative morbidity was also not different between groups (FFT: 12% vs LFT: 8%, P = 0.266). After multivariate regression analysis, only early intravenous catheter removal (on day 2) [odds ratio: 0.390; 95% confidence interval: (95% CI 0.181-0.842); P = 0.017] and the absence of intraoperative lidocaine intravenous perfusion (odds ratio: 0.182, 95% CI 0.042-0.788; P = 0.019) were identified as independent predictive factors of reduced postoperative morbidity., Conclusion: Addition of FFT multimodal management to laparoscopic approach with early oral intake and mobilization does not reduce postoperative morbidity after colorectal cancer surgery.

Background: Previous publications have suggested that endoscopic transanal proctectomy (ETAP) is a promising technique and may be an alternative to conventional low anterior resection for rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the technical feasibility of ETAP, with a particular focus on postoperative and oncological results and on functional outcomes., Methods: This study was a multicenter prospective study of unselected consecutive patients with low rectal cancer requiring proctectomy and coloanal anastomosis. All patients underwent a standardized procedure. The study endpoints were the safety and adequacy of the oncological resection criteria. All patients were evaluated with the Wexner Fecal Incontinence Questionnaire after stoma closure., Results: Fifty-six consecutive patients (41 men) underwent ETAP between February 2010 and June 2012. The median age was 65 years (39-83), and the median body mass index was 27 (20-42). No intraoperative complications were encountered. There was no postoperative mortality, and the morbidity rate was 26%. The mesorectum was complete in 47 cases (84%) and nearly complete in 9 cases (16%). The median number of lymph nodes retrieved was 12 (range, 7-29) per patient. The median radial and distal margins were 8 mm (0-20) and 10 mm (3-40), respectively. R0 resection was achieved in 53 patients (94.6%). The median Wexner score was 4 (3-12). Thirteen (28%) patients reported stool fragmentation and difficult evacuation., Conclusions: ETAP is a feasible alternative surgical option to conventional laparoscopy for rectal resection and may represent a promising step toward rectal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES).

Objectives: To assess the impact of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) on anastomotic leakage (AL) and other postoperative outcomes after esophageal cancer (EC) resection., Background: Conflicting data have emerged from randomized studies regarding the impact of NCRT on AL., Methods: Among 2944 consecutive patients operated on for EC between 2000 and 2010 in 30 European centers, patients treated by NCRT after surgery (n=593) were compared with those treated by primary surgery (n=1487). Multivariable analyses and propensity score matching were used to compensate for the differences in some baseline characteristics., Results: Patients in the NCRT group were younger, with a higher prevalence of male sex, malnutrition, advanced tumor stage, squamous cell carcinoma, and surgery after 2005 when compared with the primary surgery group. Postoperative AL rates were 8.8% versus 10.6% (P=0.220), and 90-day postoperative mortality and morbidity rates were 9.3% versus 7.2% (P=0.110) and 33.4% versus 32.1% (P=0.564), respectively. Pulmonary complication rates did not differ between groups (24.6% vs 22.5%; P=0.291), whereas chylothorax (2.5% vs 1.2%; P=0.020), cardiovascular complications (8.6% vs 0.1%; P=0.037), and thromboembolic events (8.6% vs 6.0%; P=0.037) were higher in the NCRT group. After propensity score matching, AL rates were 8.8% versus 11.3% (P=0.228), with more chylothorax (2.5% vs 0.7%; P=0.030) and trend toward more cardiovascular and thromboembolic events in the NCRT group (P=0.069). Predictors of AL were high American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, supracarinal tumoral location, and cervical anastomosis, but not NCRT., Conclusions: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy does not have an impact on the AL rate after EC resection (NCT 01927016).

Objective: Report the midterm results of laparoscopic resection for hepatocellular in chronic liver disease (CLD)., Summary Background Data: Surgical resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in chronic liver disease (CLD) remains controversial because of high morbidity and recurrence rates. Laparoscopic resection of liver tumors has recently been developed and could reduce morbidity., Methods: From 1998 to 2003, patients with HCC and CLD were considered for laparoscopic liver resection. Inclusion criteria were chronic hepatitis or Child's A cirrhosis, solitary tumor < or =5 cm in size, and location in peripheral segments of the liver. Mortality, morbidity, recurrence rates, and survival were analyzed., Results: A total of 27 patients were included. Liver resections included anatomic resection in 17 cases and non anatomic resection in 10. Seven conversions to laparotomy (26%) occurred for moderate hemorrhage in 5 cases and technical difficulties in 2 cases. Mortality and morbidity rates were 0% and 33%, respectively. Postoperative ascites and encephalopathy occurred in 2 patients (7%) who both had undergone conversion to laparotomy. Mean surgical margin was 11 mm (range, 1-47 mm). After a mean follow-up of 2 years (range, 1.1-4.7), 8 patients (30%) developed intrahepatic tumor recurrence of which one died. Treatment of recurrence was possible in 4 patients (50%), including orthotopic liver transplantation, right hepatectomy, radiofrequency ablation, and chemoembolization in 1 case each. There were no adhesions in the 2 reoperated patients. Overall and disease-free 3-year survival rates were 93% and 64%, respectively., Conclusion: Our study shows that laparoscopic liver resection for HCC in selected patients is a safe procedure with very good midterm results. This approach could have an impact on the therapeutic strategy of HCC complicating CLD as a treatment with curative intent or as a bridge to liver transplantation.

Objective: : To assess the effects of preoperative systemic chemotherapy on remnant liver parenchyma, liver function, and morbidity after major liver resection for colorectal liver metastases., Background: : Many patients operated upon for colorectal cancer liver metastases receive previous chemotherapy. Whether systemic chemotherapy alters liver parenchyma in such way that it increases the risks of liver resection remains unclear., Patients and Methods: : Among 214 patients who received a liver resection for colorectal liver metastases between 1998 and 2002 in a single institution, 67 who underwent a major liver resection under total hepatic vascular exclusion form the basis of this report. Forty-five patients operated upon after systemic chemotherapy were compared with 22 who did not receive any chemotherapy in the 6 months prior to resection. Postoperative mortality, morbidity, liver function tests, and pathology of the resected liver in the two groups were compared., Results: : There was no postoperative mortality. Values of liver function tests on days 1, 3, 5, and 10 were similar in both groups. Morbidity rate was higher in the chemotherapy group (38% versus 13.5%, P = 0.03). Postoperative morbidity was correlated with the number of cycles of chemotherapy administered before surgery but not to the type of chemotherapy. Preoperative chemotherapy was significantly associated with sinusoidal dilatation, atrophy of hepatocytes, and/or hepatocytic necrosis (49% versus 25%, P = 0.005)., Conclusion: : Prolonged neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy alters liver parenchyma and increases morbidity after major resection under total hepatic vascular exclusion, but it does not increase operative mortality. This should be taken into consideration before deciding a major liver resection in patients who have received preoperative chemotherapy.